[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5155AF24.3090305@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:11:32 +0100
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Nicolas de Pesloüan
<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Guy Streeter <streeter@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>, stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: add a synchronize_net() in netdev_rx_handler_unregister()
On 03/29/2013 02:01 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> CPU0 will see rx_handler set and yet, rx_handler_data nulled. Write
>> >barrier in rcu_assign_pointer() might prevent this reorder from happening.
>> >Therefore I suggest:
>> >
>> >diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> >index 0caa38e..c16b829 100644
>> >--- a/net/core/dev.c
>> >+++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> >@@ -3332,8 +3332,8 @@ void netdev_rx_handler_unregister(struct net_device *dev)
>> > {
>> >
>> > ASSERT_RTNL();
>> >- RCU_INIT_POINTER(dev->rx_handler, NULL);
>> >- RCU_INIT_POINTER(dev->rx_handler_data, NULL);
>> >+ rcu_assign_pointer(dev->rx_handler, NULL);
>> >+ rcu_assign_pointer(dev->rx_handler_data, NULL);
>> > }
>> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(netdev_rx_handler_unregister);
>> >
>> >
> Nope this changes nothing at all.
Erik, why doesn't help the write barrier between the assignments. It
should guarantee their orders... or not?
Thanks,
Ivan
--
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