lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:21:19 +0100 From: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net, tgr@...g.ch, Jens.Laas@...a.slu.se, hans.liss@....uu.se Subject: Re: [PATCH] fib_hash removal Paul E. McKenney writes: > > We have two users of trie_leaf_remove, fn_trie_flush and fn_trie_delete > > both are holding RTNL. So there shouldn't be need for this preempt stuff. > > This is assumed to a leftover from an older RCU-take. > > True enough! One request -- would it be reasonable to add to > trie_leaf_remove()'s comment to state that RTNL must be held > by the caller? Thanks for your review. Yes but it's implicitly assumed that updater side holds RTNL and we have a comment that states we're run by updater. If mention RTNL here we should probably comment other places too. ;) Cheers --ro - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists