From nobody Mon Jan 24 09:47:00 2022 X-Original-To: dev-commits-src-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25EB41973C5F for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 09:47:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wma@semihalf.com) Received: from mail-yb1-xb29.google.com (mail-yb1-xb29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Jj4rw067pz3M53 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 09:47:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wma@semihalf.com) Received: by mail-yb1-xb29.google.com with SMTP id g81so49330430ybg.10 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 01:47:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=semihalf-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=af2OOPGFi3dBClDeyE4iaFXRpWFmDes7NCD7A94fSBE=; b=7i19FJ+kq5NjVK21ofMmhx/z5STdAxSTt0NQ31W8NNCmt8AVbSNuciaBY+wvL3fxsE Q2Ig68eSbbWhf6kO961U1QzV3UHGvDnxBwdpB0mTcdazpfNwAg0An0Vxx4llMvOt8RYI K0Q/BgS1OEIsIzieHYrPh2xuSQ7kdXGybtC2lSwsobkWZr/hcwll0VACp3BU/ZYKAwkE Onxf0Oxyt/YdV/jJon+UoyDfIbDScRm9RS3ATU886unSt8MOhA9AfYn4/ucHRcilUdM9 nNiMyrO+rLe3kB1/IDqRQGOQJsjZ7sP/iQp53Upt/ru8/EH/zfb3B1yxP/RKwpuQGJc3 jp1w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=af2OOPGFi3dBClDeyE4iaFXRpWFmDes7NCD7A94fSBE=; b=1Ch9yZ4GxmAeuFYntHtBf24RIHxMwGWn6EPeAHLUNXv3cx51qEqO0qVpIo4yyo3Whb oUT3/1iAGdhkIgOMRjrmG1DsUudZSEmBa252AsY9aQhYNr/aUnzAK/IPpb6K35gK1LEm oodG/hcA/thc/wb6ZSrFKKJodM7R3RykFRIbMUphsESqTpfVsKwHEluk4ZOjobR1RspU xolyLLRJB9UvQkjgtTxDNvS8sQPjazQ28RweAZ2ToZZTpCIHp4SH3aKF1QR9e7CFhGl/ hiXYPfYxXoXpeQxVgXD+7EE9EZk8jgwKUT1aIMywD8J/QW6caX5+2p3tiAlbimVnrVc6 lVoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53100m+pGy4FYH7EkTsKIwKjyplqBVcCPvtUZScX8TDZpeaC5KZr fHkqDsZFT5Np4batT8Ds/hilf6y6da748SrT+l3MmQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/bklExQaQW+uwxrqXSuGz/qYEWPb4GF7AbWqyGjJw5hkouYfHLc45JwhCi1BD97B5E8kMuwkSJAezzAOE8cc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1209:: with SMTP id s9mr11854866ybu.594.1643017631340; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 01:47:11 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the src repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-src-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202201210519.20L5J1mJ029323@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <7A991003-0F24-4C8C-81FD-84F39FC78D8A@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: From: Wojciech Macek Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:47:00 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: git: 9ce46cbc95d7 - main - ip_mroute: move ip_mrouter_done outside lock To: Gleb Smirnoff Cc: Kristof Provost , Wojciech Macek , src-committers , "" , dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000046aa1f05d650da99" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Jj4rw067pz3M53 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N --00000000000046aa1f05d650da99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I must have copied it from some line above, now I see you recently refactored that part. Indeed, epoch_assert is called inside ip_input so I see no reason why not to remove RLOCK/RUNLOCK there. Will test it and update once ready. Thanks, Wojtek pon., 24 sty 2022 o 05:41 Gleb Smirnoff napisa=C5=82(= a): > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 07:24:36PM +0100, Wojciech Macek wrote: > W> This is an orginal fix. The issue was visible due to race between ip > W> input/output and mrouter uninit. > W> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D29946 > > Why did you add another net epoch tracker under different name? Just addi= ng > NET_EPOCH_WAIT() to X_ip_mrouter_done() would provide the same effect > without > any modifications to the rest of the stack. > > -- > Gleb Smirnoff > --00000000000046aa1f05d650da99 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I must have copied it from some line above, now I see you = recently refactored that part. Indeed, epoch_assert is called inside ip_inp= ut so I see no reason why not to remove RLOCK/RUNLOCK=C2=A0there. Will test= =C2=A0it and update once ready.

Thanks,
Wojtek=

pon., 24 sty 2022 o 05:41=C2=A0Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> napisa=C5=82(a):
On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 07:= 24:36PM +0100, Wojciech Macek wrote:
W> This is an orginal fix. The issue was visible due to race between ip<= br> W> input/output and mrouter uninit.
W> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D29946

Why did you add another net epoch tracker under different name? Just adding=
NET_EPOCH_WAIT() to X_ip_mrouter_done() would provide the same effect witho= ut
any modifications to the rest of the stack.

--
Gleb Smirnoff
--00000000000046aa1f05d650da99--