[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201005042341.49480.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 23:41:49 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
dvhltc@...ibm.com, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 28/48] net: Make accesses to ->br_port safe for sparse RCU
On Tuesday 04 May 2010 23:26:31 Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > The new versions of the rcu_dereference() APIs requires that any pointers
> > passed to one of these APIs be fully defined. The ->br_port field
> > in struct net_device points to a struct net_bridge_port, which is an
> > incomplete type. This commit therefore changes ->br_port to be a void*,
> > and introduces a br_port() helper function to convert the type to struct
> > net_bridge_port, and applies this new helper function where required.
> >
>
> I would rather make the bridge hook generic and not take a type argument.
Not sure if you were confused by the comment in the same way that I was.
The bridge hook is not impacted by this at all, since we can either pass
a void* or a struct net_bridge_port* to it. The br_port() helper
is used for all the places where we actually want to dereference
dev->br_port and access its contents.
Arnd
--
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