On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 01:31:57PM +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 06:48:33PM +0200, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > The main threat to data consistency in ice_xdp() is a possible asynchronous
> > PF reset. It can be triggered by a user or by TX timeout handler.
> >
> > XDP se
On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 06:48:33PM +0200, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> The main threat to data consistency in ice_xdp() is a possible asynchronous
> PF reset. It can be triggered by a user or by TX timeout handler.
>
> XDP setup and PF reset code access the same resources in the following
> sections:
>
gnus
>Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v2 2/6] ice: protect XDP
>configuration
>with a mutex
>
>The main threat to data consistency in ice_xdp() is a possible asynchronous PF
>reset. It can be triggered by a user or by TX timeout handler.
>
>XDP setup and PF reset
On 7/24/2024 9:48 AM, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> The main threat to data consistency in ice_xdp() is a possible asynchronous
> PF reset. It can be triggered by a user or by TX timeout handler.
>
> XDP setup and PF reset code access the same resources in the following
> sections:
> * ice_vsi_close(
The main threat to data consistency in ice_xdp() is a possible asynchronous
PF reset. It can be triggered by a user or by TX timeout handler.
XDP setup and PF reset code access the same resources in the following
sections:
* ice_vsi_close() in ice_prepare_for_reset() - already rtnl-locked
* ice_vs
