Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 09/10] bng_en: implement netdev_stat_ops

From: Simon Horman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 11:27:04 +0000

This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.

For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
bng_en: implement netdev_stat_ops

This patch adds netdev_stat_ops implementation to provide standardized
per-queue statistics via the Netlink API, including hardware drop
counters.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnge/bnge_netdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnge/bnge_netdev.c
> index 2513b0907693..fa732b99358e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnge/bnge_netdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnge/bnge_netdev.c
> @@ -3031,6 +3031,81 @@ static int bnge_close(struct net_device *dev)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>
> +static void bnge_get_queue_stats_rx(struct net_device *dev, int i,
> +				    struct netdev_queue_stats_rx *stats)
> +{
> +	struct bnge_net *bn = netdev_priv(dev);
> +	struct bnge_nq_ring_info *nqr;
> +	u64 *sw;
> +
> +	if (!bn->bnapi)
> +		return;
> +
> +	nqr = &bn->bnapi[i]->nq_ring;
                ^^^^

Can this race with bnge_close_core and dereference bn->bnapi after it's
freed? The NULL check at line 3041 doesn't prevent the race since
bnge_close_core can free bn->bnapi between the check and dereference.

Looking at the existing bnge_get_stats64, it uses rcu_read_lock() when
accessing bn->bnapi:

bnge_get_stats64() {
    rcu_read_lock();
    if (test_bit(BNGE_STATE_OPEN, &bd->state)) {
        ... access bn->bnapi ...
    }
    rcu_read_unlock();
}

And bnge_close_core uses synchronize_rcu() to wait for readers before
freeing:

bnge_close_core() {
    ...
    synchronize_rcu();
    bnge_del_napi(bn);
        -> bnge_free_core(bn);
            -> bn->bnapi = NULL;
}

Without RCU protection, this sequence can occur:

Thread A (stats)                  Thread B (close)
----------------                  ----------------
if (!bn->bnapi)  [PASSES]
                                  bnge_close_core()
                                    bnge_free_core()
                                      bn->bnapi = NULL
nqr = &bn->bnapi[i]  [CRASH]

Should bnge_get_queue_stats_rx acquire rcu_read_lock() and check
test_bit(BNGE_STATE_OPEN) before accessing bn->bnapi?

> +	sw = nqr->stats.sw_stats;
> +
> +	stats->packets = 0;
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_ucast_pkts);
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_mcast_pkts);
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_bcast_pkts);
> +
> +	stats->bytes = 0;
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_ucast_bytes);
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_mcast_bytes);
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_bcast_bytes);
> +
> +	stats->hw_drop_overruns = BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_discard_pkts);
> +	stats->hw_drops = BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_error_pkts) +
> +				stats->hw_drop_overruns;
> +}
> +
> +static void bnge_get_queue_stats_tx(struct net_device *dev, int i,
> +				    struct netdev_queue_stats_tx *stats)
> +{
> +	struct bnge_net *bn = netdev_priv(dev);
> +	struct bnge_napi *bnapi;
> +	u64 *sw;
> +
> +	if (!bn->tx_ring)
> +		return;
> +
> +	bnapi = bn->tx_ring[bn->tx_ring_map[i]].bnapi;
                ^^^^

Does this have the same race with bnge_close_core? The NULL check doesn't
prevent bnge_close_core from freeing bn->tx_ring between the check and
dereference.

Following the same pattern as bnge_get_stats64, should this also use
rcu_read_lock() and check BNGE_STATE_OPEN before accessing bn->tx_ring?

> +	sw = bnapi->nq_ring.stats.sw_stats;
> +
> +	stats->packets = 0;
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_ucast_pkts);
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_mcast_pkts);
> +	stats->packets += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_bcast_pkts);
> +
> +	stats->bytes = 0;
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_ucast_bytes);
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_mcast_bytes);
> +	stats->bytes += BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_bcast_bytes);
> +
> +	stats->hw_drop_errors = BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_error_pkts);
> +	stats->hw_drops = BNGE_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_discard_pkts) +
> +				stats->hw_drop_errors;
> +}
> +
> +static void bnge_get_base_stats(struct net_device *dev,
> +				struct netdev_queue_stats_rx *rx,
> +				struct netdev_queue_stats_tx *tx)
> +{
> +	struct bnge_net *bn = netdev_priv(dev);
> +
> +	rx->packets = bn->net_stats_prev.rx_packets;
> +	rx->bytes = bn->net_stats_prev.rx_bytes;
       ^^^^

Can this race with bnge_close_core when reading bn->net_stats_prev?
bnge_close_core writes to bn->net_stats_prev while this function reads
it without any locking.

Looking at bnge_get_stats64, it uses rcu_read_lock() before accessing
bn->net_stats_prev. While this won't cause a crash like the other two
issues, it could result in torn reads on 32-bit systems where reading
u64 is not atomic, potentially returning inconsistent statistics to
userspace.

Should bnge_get_base_stats also use rcu_read_lock() when reading
bn->net_stats_prev?

> +
> +	tx->packets = bn->net_stats_prev.tx_packets;
> +	tx->bytes = bn->net_stats_prev.tx_bytes;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct netdev_stat_ops bnge_stat_ops = {
> +	.get_queue_stats_rx	= bnge_get_queue_stats_rx,
> +	.get_queue_stats_tx	= bnge_get_queue_stats_tx,
> +	.get_base_stats		= bnge_get_base_stats,
> +};
> +

[ ... ]