Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 04:34:25PM CEST, niko...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote:
>On 10/12/2015 03:15 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>>
>> Similar to the attr usecase, the caller knows if he is holding RTNL and is
>> in atomic section. So let the called to decide the correct call variant.
>>
>> This allows drivers to sleep inside their ops and wait for hw to get the
>> operation status. Then the status is propagated into switchdev core.
>> This avoids silent errors in drivers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>> ---
>> include/net/switchdev.h | 1 +
>> net/switchdev/switchdev.c | 137
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>> 2 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>
>[snip]
>> +
>> +struct switchdev_obj_work {
>> + struct work_struct work;
>> + struct net_device *dev;
>> + struct switchdev_obj obj;
>> + bool add; /* add of del */
>s/of/or/ ? :-)
will fix, thanks.
>
>> +};
>> +
>> +static void switchdev_port_obj_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> +{
>> + struct switchdev_obj_work *ow =
>> + container_of(work, struct switchdev_obj_work, work);
>> + bool rtnl_locked = rtnl_is_locked();
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + if (!rtnl_locked)
>> + rtnl_lock();
>> + if (ow->add)
>> + err = switchdev_port_obj_add_now(ow->dev, &ow->obj);
>> + else
>> + err = switchdev_port_obj_del_now(ow->dev, &ow->obj);
>> + if (err && err != -EOPNOTSUPP)
>> + netdev_err(ow->dev, "failed (err=%d) to %s object (id=%d)\n",
>> + err, ow->add ? "add" : "del", ow->obj.id);
>> + if (!rtnl_locked)
>> + rtnl_unlock();
>> +
>> + dev_put(ow->dev);
>> + kfree(ow);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int switchdev_port_obj_work_schedule(struct net_device *dev,
>> + const struct switchdev_obj *obj,
>> + bool add)
>> +{
>> + struct switchdev_obj_work *ow;
>> +
>> + ow = kmalloc(sizeof(*ow), GFP_ATOMIC);
>> + if (!ow)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + INIT_WORK(&ow->work, switchdev_port_obj_work);
>> +
>This can be called without rtnl, what stops the device from disappearing
>between the above and the hold below ?
You are right. I will have to figure that out. Btw the same issue
already exists for attr_set deferred work.
>
>> + dev_hold(dev);
>> + ow->dev = dev;
>> + memcpy(&ow->obj, obj, sizeof(ow->obj));
>> + ow->add = add;
>> +
>> + queue_work(switchdev_wq, &ow->work);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>[snip]
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
