[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 06:17:41 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] net: remove some useless list_del()
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 23:40 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 17:11 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> >> "list_kill" is allocated on stack and it's a list head,
> >> it is pointless to call list_del(&kill_list) especially
> >> after unregister_netdevice_many().
> >
> > How pointless exactly ? Explain more please.
> >
> > I suggest you read various commits adding these list_del()
> >
> > f87e6f47933e3ebeced9bb12615e830a72cedce4 is a good start.
> >
>
> If after unregister_netdevice_many() dev->unreg_list is still needed,
> then it's a nightmare to maintain these list_head's in dev:
>
> struct list_head dev_list;
> struct list_head napi_list;
> struct list_head unreg_list;
> struct list_head close_list;
>
> struct list_head todo_list;
>
> Same for struct net.
You did not really understood the problem.
This has _nothing_ to do with dev->unreg_list
Really this is all explained in the commit I gave.
In fact I suspect following is even needed :
Force the list_del() in unregister_netdevice_many(), because is really
too confusing and a common source of bugs.
I'll send a patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists