[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1206282899.7528.18.camel@iris.sw.ru>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:34:59 +0300
From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, dlezcano@...ibm.com,
benjamin.thery@...l.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [IPV6]: Event type in addrconf_ifdown is mis-used.
On Sun, 2008-03-23 at 03:17 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>
> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 11:13:16 +0300
>
> > First, this behaviour is broken for a namespace right now in the 2.6.26
> > tree. inet6_dev pointer will be NULL for a loopback inside the
> > namespace. The case is simple. Just remove all INET6 addresses from a
> > loopback device inside a VE. This will call
> > inet6_addr_del
> > addrconf_ifdown(dev, 1);
> > if (dev == init_net.loopback_dev && how == 1)
> > how = 0;
> > the condition will be false and how will not be changed here.
>
> That's a bug.
>
> You can't mark any namespace's loopback device's inet6_dev as NULL
> until you know that all routes, devices, and packets referring to such
> devices and routes in that namespace are %100 gone and unreferenced.
>
> It is now obviously apparent that there are several severe errors
> here.
You are perfectly correct and the place in addrconf_cleanup is that
place when we believe that we should destroy all the staff.
You see, it is pretty useless to call addrconf_ifdown(dev, 2) after
addrconf_dev(dev, 0) for a loopback in the current code! No new cleanups
will be performed for 2, pls check :)
--
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