Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] improve ethtool/rtnl vs devlink locking

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 13:30:08 +0000

Hello:

This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (master)
by David S. Miller <[email-masked]>:

On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 10:18:47 -0700 you wrote:
> During ethtool netlink development we decided to move some of
> the commmands to devlink. Since we don't want drivers to implement
> both devlink and ethtool version of the commands ethtool ioctl
> falls back to calling devlink. Unfortunately devlink locks must
> be taken before rtnl_lock. This results in a questionable
> dev_hold() / rtnl_unlock() / devlink / rtnl_lock() / dev_put()
> pattern.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [net-next,v2,1/4] ethtool: push the rtnl_lock into dev_ethtool()
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/f49deaa64af1
  - [net-next,v2,2/4] ethtool: handle info/flash data copying outside rtnl_lock
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/095cfcfe13e5
  - [net-next,v2,3/4] devlink: expose get/put functions
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/46db1b77cd4f
  - [net-next,v2,4/4] ethtool: don't drop the rtnl_lock half way thru the ioctl
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/1af0a0948e28

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html