[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1155140394.12225.88.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:19:54 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 18:18 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> 2006-08-09 16:07
> > I think Daniel was thinking of adding struct net_device *
> > sk_buff::alloc_dev,
> > I know I was after reading the first few mails. However if adding a
> > field
> > there is strict no-no....
> >
> > /me takes a look at struct sk_buff
> >
> > Hmm, what does sk_buff::input_dev do? That seems to store the initial
> > device?
>
> No, skb->input_dev is used when redirecting packets around in the
> stack and may change. Even if it would keep its value the reference
> to the netdevice is not valid anymore when you free the skb as the
> skb was queued and the refcnt acquired in __netifx_rx_schedule()
> has been released again thus making it possible for the netdevice
> to disappear.
Bah, tricky stuff that.
disregards this part from -v2 then :-(
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists