On 1/2/2025 10:44 AM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 07:31:27PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 07:18:08 +0000 Hangbin Liu wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 06:27:34AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 07:11:25 +0000 Hangbin Liu wrote:
The first patch fixes the xfrm offload feature during setup active-backup
mode. The second patch add a ipsec offload testing.
Looks like the test is too good, is there a fix pending somewhere for
the BUG below? We can't merge the test before that:
This should be a regression of 2aeeef906d5a ("bonding: change ipsec_lock from
spin lock to mutex"). As in xfrm_state_delete we called spin_lock_bh(&x->lock)
for the xfrm state delete.
But I'm not sure if it's proper to release the spin lock in bond code.
This seems too specific.
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
index 7daeab67e7b5..69563bc958ca 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -592,6 +592,7 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa(struct xfrm_state *xs)
real_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_delete(xs);
out:
netdev_put(real_dev, &tracker);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&xs->lock);
mutex_lock(&bond->ipsec_lock);
list_for_each_entry(ipsec, &bond->ipsec_list, list) {
if (ipsec->xs == xs) {
@@ -601,6 +602,7 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa(struct xfrm_state *xs)
}
}
mutex_unlock(&bond->ipsec_lock);
+ spin_lock_bh(&xs->lock);
}
What do you think?
Re-locking doesn't look great, glancing at the code I don't see any
obvious better workarounds. Easiest fix would be to don't let the
drivers sleep in the callbacks and then we can go back to a spin lock.
Maybe nvidia people have better ideas, I'm not familiar with this
offload.
I don't know how to disable bonding sleeping since we use mutex_lock now.
Hi Jianbo, do you have any idea?
I think we should allow drivers to sleep in the callbacks. So, maybe
it's better to move driver's xdo_dev_state_delete out of state's spin lock.
Thanks!
Jianbo
