lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next 3/4] hv_netvsc: reset net_device_ctx->nvdev with rcu_assign_pointer()
Date
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:

> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:40:06 +0100
>
>> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 14:42 +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>>> RCU_INIT_POINTER() is not suitable here as it doesn't give us ordering
>>>> guarantees (see the comment in rcupdate.h). This is also not a hotpath.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc.c | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc.c b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc.c
>>>> index bfc79698b8f4..12efb3e34775 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc.c
>>>> @@ -560,7 +560,7 @@ void netvsc_device_remove(struct hv_device *device)
>>>>
>>>> netvsc_revoke_buf(device, net_device);
>>>>
>>>> - RCU_INIT_POINTER(net_device_ctx->nvdev, NULL);
>>>> + rcu_assign_pointer(net_device_ctx->nvdev, NULL);
>>>
>>> I see no point for this patch.
>>>
>>> Setting a NULL pointer needs no barrier at all.
>>
>> Oh, sorry, I got confused by the comment near RCU_INIT_POINTER() in
>> rcupdate.h. Now looking at their definitions I see.
>>
>> This patch can of course be dropped from the series.
>
> Any time there is a change to the series, you must resubmit the entire
> series.
>

Sure, will do. Just wanted to give it a couple of days to see if
Microsoft guys or someone else have any comments.

Thanks,

--
Vitaly

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-31 15:51    [W:0.059 / U:1.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site