[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241017181022.GB25857@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 20:10:22 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Stefan Wiehler <stefan.wiehler@...ia.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v6 05/10] ip6mr: Lock RTNL before ip6mr_new_table()
call in ip6mr_rules_init()
Stefan Wiehler <stefan.wiehler@...ia.com> wrote:
> + rtnl_lock();
> mrt = ip6mr_new_table(net, RT6_TABLE_DFLT);
> if (IS_ERR(mrt)) {
> err = PTR_ERR(mrt);
> goto err1;
> }
> + rtnl_unlock();
>
> err = fib_default_rule_add(ops, 0x7fff, RT6_TABLE_DFLT, 0);
> if (err < 0)
> @@ -254,6 +256,7 @@ static int __net_init ip6mr_rules_init(struct net *net)
> ip6mr_free_table(mrt);
> rtnl_unlock();
> err1:
> + rtnl_unlock();
Looks like a double-unlock?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists