On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:20:23PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 10:53 PM Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 10:46:00PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > You can not use dev_base_lock() or RCU and call an ndo_get_stats64() > > > that could sleep. > > > > > > You can not for example start changing bonding, since bond_get_stats() > > > could be called from non-sleepable context (net/core/net-procfs.c) > > > > > > I am still referring to your patch adding : > > > > > > + if (!rtnl_locked) > > > + rtnl_lock(); > > > > > > This is all I said. > > > > Ah, ok, well I didn't show you all the patches, did I? > > > Have you sent them during Thanksgiving perhaps ? > > I suggest you follow normal submission process, sending patch series > rather than inlining multiple patches in one email, this is becoming > hard to follow.
No, I did not post these at all formally for review, nor do I intend to. I just wrote them "for fun" (if this could be called fun) to get an idea of how much there is to change, in the "best case" where I do no rework to the locking at all, just use what's currently available. And I can't submit these patches as-is, because of lockdep warnings in bonding. I will post patches formally for review when I have a clear migration plan.
