[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090415112813.GH21342@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:28:14 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jgarzik@...ox.com, davem@...emloft.net,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
fubar@...ibm.com, bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
mschmidt@...hat.com, ivecera@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: introduce a list of device addresses
dev_addr_list
Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 01:22:32PM CEST, kaber@...sh.net wrote:
> Jiri Pirko wrote:
>
>>> Since you obviously need a write lock here to be sure following
>>> can be done by one cpu only.
>>>
>>> You have same problem all over this patch.
>>
>> Yes, as Dave wrote, this is guarded by RTNL mutex.
>
> This was incorrect. IPv6 adds multicast addresses in softirq context.
Yes, I see that.
>
>>>> +
>>>> + ha = kzalloc(sizeof(*ha), GFP_ATOMIC);
>>> kzalloc(max(sizeof(*ha), L1_CACHE_SIZE), GFP_...) is thus higly recommended here.
>>>
>>> Also, why GFP_ATOMIC is needed here ?
>>
>> Yes, it is not needed here. I've copied it here from the original unicast and
>> multicast add funtion to stay close but as I can see, there is no need for it
>> there either.
>> Noted.
>
> Also needed for IPv6 in softirq context.
>
Noted...
--
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