Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210315135720.002213995@linuxfoundation.org> <20210315135720.418426545@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20210316095049.GB12946@amd>
In-Reply-To: <20210316095049.GB12946@amd>
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Mar 2021 10:59:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CANn89iLnNF0+=dSr9wJFbH+vDene0cnhq4wN0WVBP85Ty3s4AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 012/120] tcp: annotate tp->write_seq lockless reads
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:50 AM Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de> wrote:
>

> > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
> > @@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ struct sock *tcp_create_openreq_child(co
> >       newtp->app_limited = ~0U;
> >
> >       tcp_init_xmit_timers(newsk);
> > -     newtp->write_seq = newtp->pushed_seq = treq->snt_isn + 1;
> > +     WRITE_ONCE(newtp->write_seq, newtp->pushed_seq = treq->snt_isn + 1);
>
> Would it be better to do assignment to pushed_seq outside of
> WRITE_ONCE macro? This is ... "interesting".

You are probably right, this looks odd and was not something I intended.
It happened to just work, but feel free to send a patch to clean it up.

Thanks.