Hello Alexander, Jakub, Quoting Alexander Duyck (2020-12-22 00:21:57) > > Looking over this patch it seems kind of obvious that extending the > xps_map_mutex is making things far more complex then they need to be. > > Applying the rtnl_mutex would probably be much simpler. Although as I > think you have already discovered we need to apply it to the store, > and show for this interface. In addition we probably need to perform > similar locking around traffic_class_show in order to prevent it from > generating a similar error.
I don't think we have the same kind of issues with traffic_class_show: dev->num_tc is used, but not for navigating through the map. Protecting only a single read wouldn't change much. We can still think about what could go wrong here without the lock, but that is not related to this series of fixes. If I understood correctly, as things are a bit too complex now, you would prefer that we go for the solution proposed in v1? I can still do the code factoring for the 2 sysfs show operations, but that would then target net-next and would be in a different series. So I believe we'll use the patches of v1, unmodified. Jakub, should I send a v3 then? Thanks! Antoine
