-
Vladimir Oltean authored
It was a documented fact that ds->ops->change_tag_protocol() offered rtnetlink mutex protection to the switch driver, since there was an ASSERT_RTNL right before the call in dsa_switch_change_tag_proto() (initiated from sysfs). The blamed commit introduced another call path for ds->ops->change_tag_protocol() which does not hold the rtnl_mutex. This is: dsa_tree_setup -> dsa_tree_setup_switches -> dsa_switch_setup -> dsa_switch_setup_tag_protocol -> ds->ops->change_tag_protocol() -> dsa_port_setup -> dsa_slave_create -> register_netdevice(slave_dev) -> dsa_tree_setup_master -> dsa_master_setup -> dev->dsa_ptr = cpu_dp The reason why the rtnl_mutex is held in the sysfs call path is to ensure that, once the master and all the DSA interfaces are down (which is required so that no packets flow), they remain down during the tagging protocol change. The above calling order illustrates the fact that it should not be risky to change the initial tagging protocol to the one specified in the device tree at the given time: - packets cannot enter the dsa_switch_rcv() packet type handler since netdev_uses_dsa() for the master will not yet return true, since dev->dsa_ptr has not yet been populated - packets cannot enter the dsa_slave_xmit() function because no DSA interface has yet been registered So from the DSA core's perspective, holding the rtnl_mutex is indeed not necessary. Yet, drivers may need to do things which need rtnl_mutex protection. For example: felix_set_tag_protocol -> felix_setup_tag_8021q -> dsa_tag_8021q_register -> dsa_tag_8021q_setup -> dsa_tag_8021q_port_setup -> vlan_vid_add -> ASSERT_RTNL These drivers do not really have a choice to take the rtnl_mutex themselves, since in the sysfs case, the rtnl_mutex is already held. Fixes: deff7107 ("net: dsa: Allow default tag protocol to be overridden from DT") Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
1951b3f1