Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-71675-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <b3c31f4c-e837-47b6-bd0d-e8cf2b9964aa@bootlin.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 17:24:55 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] wifi: wilc1000: fix RCU usage
Content-Language: en-US
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Ajay Singh <ajay.kathat@microchip.com>,
 Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>,
 Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240215-wilc_fix_rcu_usage-v1-0-f610e46c6f82@bootlin.com>
 <87h6i4mnoj.fsf@kernel.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Alexis_Lothor=C3=A9?= <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
In-Reply-To: <87h6i4mnoj.fsf@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2/19/24 17:19, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com> writes:
> 
>> This small series aims to fix multiple warnings observed when enabling
>> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST:
>> - add missing locks to create corresponding critical read sections
>> - fix mix between RCU and SRCU API usage
>>
>> While at it, since SRCU API is already in use in the driver, any fix done
>> on RCU usage was also done with the SRCU variant of RCU API. I do not
>> really get why we are using SRCU in this driver instead of classic RCU, as
>> it seems to be done in any other wireless driver.
> 
> And even more so, no other driver in drivers/net use SRCU.
> 
>> My understanding is that primary SRCU use case is for compatibility
>> with realtime kernel, which needs to be preemptible everywhere. Has
>> the driver been really developped with this constraint in mind ? If
>> you have more details about this, feel free to educate me.
> 
> Alexis, if you have the time I recommend submitting a patchset
> converting wilc1000 to use classic RCU. At least I have a hard time
> understanding why SRCU is needed, especially after seeing the warning
> you found.

If nobody else comes in with a strong argument in favor of keeping SRCU, yes I
can certainly add that to my backlog :)

-- 
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com