> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nitka, Grzegorz
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2026 9:42 PM
> To: Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>; Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Cc: Vecera, Ivan <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kitszel,
> Przemyslaw <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Nguyen, Anthony L
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v14 net-next 04/13] dpll: send delete notification before
> unregister in on-pin rollback
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Intel-wired-lan <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
> > Nitka, Grzegorz
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2026 9:10 AM
> > To: Kubalewski, Arkadiusz <[email protected]>;
> > [email protected]
> > Cc: Vecera, Ivan <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kitszel,
> > Przemyslaw <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; Nguyen, Anthony L
> > <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v14 net-next 04/13] dpll: send delete
> > notification before unregister in on-pin rollback
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Kubalewski, Arkadiusz <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Monday, June 8, 2026 6:45 PM
> > > To: Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Oros,
> > Petr
> > > <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > [email protected];
> > > Kitszel, Przemyslaw <[email protected]>; Nguyen, Anthony L
> > > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Vecera,
> > > Ivan <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v14 net-next 04/13] dpll: send delete notification
> > before
> > > unregister in on-pin rollback
> > >
> > > >From: Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>
> > > >Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2026 8:31 PM
> > > >
> > > >The rollback path in dpll_pin_on_pin_register() called
> > > >__dpll_pin_unregister() before dpll_pin_delete_ntf(). When the
> > > >unregister dropped the pin's last DPLL reference it cleared the
> > > >DPLL_REGISTERED mark in dpll_pin_xa, so the subsequent
> > > >dpll_pin_event_send() failed dpll_pin_available() and aborted with
> > > >-ENODEV. As a result userspace was never notified of the rollback
> > > >deletion and remained out of sync with the kernel.
> > > >
> > > >Send the delete notification first, matching the order used by
> > > >dpll_pin_unregister() and dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister().
> > > >
> > > >Fixes: 9d71b54b65b1 ("dpll: netlink: Add DPLL framework base
> functions")
> > > >Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Nitka <[email protected]>
> > > >---
> > > > drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > >diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> > > >index cea7e2be2cbc..80195f3a84f3 100644
> > > >--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> > > >+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> > > >@@ -1007,9 +1007,9 @@ int dpll_pin_on_pin_register(struct dpll_pin
> > > >*parent, struct dpll_pin *pin,
> > > > dpll_unregister:
> > > > xa_for_each(&parent->dpll_refs, i, ref)
> > > > if (i < stop) {
> > > >+ dpll_pin_delete_ntf(pin);
> > > > __dpll_pin_unregister(ref->dpll, pin, ops, priv,
> > > > parent);
> > > >- dpll_pin_delete_ntf(pin);
> > >
> > > Hey Grzegorz,
> > >
> > > Since patch 7/13 this is already part of __dpll_pin_unregister ?
> > > The call should be removed at all? Please make sure all calls to
> > > __dpll_pin_unregister(..) are aware of that, also maybe better to
> > > put this all related to one patch?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, I think this patch is a good candidate to squash with 7/13 (with
> > proper commit message edit).
> > Same 'Fixes' tag and both touch notifications fix.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Grzegorz
>
> Hi Arek,
>
> I revisited your comment, from the perspective of redundant calls
> to dpll_pin_delete_ntf after patch 7/13 is applied to.
> Yes, there are still 2 "redundant" calls to dpll_pin_delete_ntf on top of
> __dpll_pin_unregister.
> I'm going to send v14 with this fix and reordered commits in the patchset
> (7/13 moved up).
>
> Regards
>
> Grzegorz
>
Wait ... those 2 mentioned calls to dpll_pin_delete_ntf are symmetric behavior
for calls to dpll_pin_create_ntf on success path in dpll_pin_on_pin_register.
I don't understand why there are two pin create notifications needed (inside
and
Outside of __dpll_pin_register).
However it's long-standing code, maybe there is a consensus to have two calls.
So I'm skeptical to change it, unless someone tell me it's the right thing to
do.
It's out of scope of this series, in my opinion. I'd leave it as it is.
Regards
Grzegorz
> > > > }
> > > > dpll_xa_ref_pin_del(&pin->parent_refs, parent, ops, priv, pin);
> > > > unlock:
> > > >--
> > > >2.39.3
