From: Hayes Wang <hayesw...@realtek.com> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:43:32 +0000
> Jiri Slaby [mailto:jsl...@suse.cz] >> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2019 4:55 PM > [...] >> Could you clarify *why* it conflicts? And how is the problem fixed by >> 0ee1f473496 avoided now? > > In rtl8152_disconnect(), the flow would be as following. > > static void rtl8152_disconnect(struct usb_interface *intf) > { > ... > - netif_napi_del(&tp->napi); > - unregister_netdev(tp->netdev); > - rtl8152_close > - napi_disable > > Therefore you add a checking of RTL8152_UNPLUG to avoid > calling napi_disable() after netif_napi_del(). However, > after commit ffa9fec30ca0 ("r8152: set RTL8152_UNPLUG > only for real disconnection"), RTL8152_UNPLUG is not > always set when calling rtl8152_disconnect(). That is, > napi_disable() would be called after netif_napi_del(), > if RTL8152_UNPLUG is not set. > > The best way is to avoid calling netif_napi_del() before > calling unregister_netdev(). And I has submitted such > patch following this one. These details belong in the commit message, always.
