[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48E34C82.2040306@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:10:10 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: benjamin.thery@...l.net, jarkao2@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: deadlock during net device unregistration
David Miller wrote:
> From: Benjamin Thery <benjamin.thery@...l.net>
> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:18:25 +0200
>
>> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 04:42:04PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>>> Benjamin Thery wrote, On 09/30/2008 01:52 PM:
>>> ...
>>>>> I'm still looking at why the first dst_free() on those particular routes doesn't call dst_destroy() immediately but defers it (another refcount
>>>>> on the route itself).
>>>> Yes, finding/fixing this, if possible, in this place looks like the
>>>> most consistent with the way netdev_wait_allrefs() is handling this.
>>> Actually, I wonder, why we can't simply run this dst_gc_task() from
>>> dst_dev_event() (after cancelling the work) when needed.
>>>
>> Um... I haven't thought about this. I'll have a look to see if it can
>> solve our issue.
>
> Let me know what happens, I'd like to apply some fix soon.
> So just report the patch implementing the final approach you
> feel the most comfortable with.
We did the modification suggested by Jarek and that fix the problem :)
We are playing a bit with this patch to check if we didn't missed
something. We will certainly send it in the next hours.
Thanks.
--
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