Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Message-ID: <7ea4c3fe-a911-4161-af13-7f1d55def7e3@tuxon.dev>
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:11:17 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: macb: Unregister nedev before MDIO bus in remove
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc:     nicolas.ferre@microchip.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
        hkallweit1@gmail.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, jgarzik@pobox.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20231126141046.3505343-1-claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>
 <20231126141046.3505343-3-claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>
 <086fc661-0974-4bb6-a8ae-daa9d53361d9@lunn.ch>
From:   claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>
In-Reply-To: <086fc661-0974-4bb6-a8ae-daa9d53361d9@lunn.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 26.11.2023 19:13, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> index cebae0f418f2..73d041af3de1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> @@ -5165,11 +5165,11 @@ static void macb_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  
>>  	if (dev) {
>>  		bp = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +		unregister_netdev(dev);
>>  		phy_exit(bp->sgmii_phy);
>>  		mdiobus_unregister(bp->mii_bus);
>>  		mdiobus_free(bp->mii_bus);
>>  
>> -		unregister_netdev(dev);
>>  		tasklet_kill(&bp->hresp_err_tasklet);
> 
> 
> I don't know this driver...
> 
> What does this tasklet do? 

It handles bus errors that my happens while DMA fetches data from system
memory. It re-initializes the TX/RX, DMA buffers, clear interrupts,
stop/start all tx queues.

> Is it safe for it to run after the netdev
> is unregistered, and the PHY and the mdio bus is gone? 

Not really, as it accesses netdev specific data.

> Maybe this
> tasklet_kill should be after the interrupt is disabled, but before the
> netdev is unregistered?

That would be a better place, indeed.

Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea

> 
> If you have one bug here, there might be others.
> 
> 	Andrew