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: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 09:34:46 -0700 From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> To: Moni Shoua <monisonlists@...il.com> Cc: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>, OpenFabrics General <general@...ts.openfabrics.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH V5 2/11] IB/ipoib: Notify the world before doing unregister > The action in bonding to a detach of slave is to unregister the master (see patch 10). > This can't be done from the context of unregister_netdevice itself (it is protected by rtnl_lock). I'm confused. Your patch has: > + ipoib_slave_detach(cpriv->dev); > unregister_netdev(cpriv->dev); And ipoib_slave_detach() is: > +static inline void ipoib_slave_detach(struct net_device *dev) > +{ > + rtnl_lock(); > + netdev_slave_detach(dev); > + rtnl_unlock(); > +} so you are calling netdev_slave_detach() with the rtnl lock held. Why can't you make the same call from the start of unregister_netdevice()? Anyway, if the rtnl lock is a problem, can you just add the call to netdev_slave_detach() to unregister_netdev() before it takes the rtnl lock? - R. - 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