[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+k4tiyQtb6fh8USDjhZGVwdx1puh8cr9NcDQECbvJvdg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 18:23:03 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dev: Detect dev_hold() after netdev_wait_allrefs()
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 6:22 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 03:14:14 +0100 Jann Horn wrote:
> > Oh. Whoops. That's what I get for only testing without CONFIG_PCPU_DEV_REFCNT...
> >
> > I guess a better place to put the new check would be directly after
> > checking for "dev->reg_state == NETREG_UNREGISTERING"? Like this?
>
> Possibly a very silly suggestion but perhaps we should set
> the pointer to NULL for the pcpu case and let it crash?
It is already set to 0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists