[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m18wjqs7x4.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:27:19 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless extensions: play with netns
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> writes:
> On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 01:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 16:24 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> > > So it looks like I can also use rcu_read_lock(), but there's no
>> > > for_each_net_rcu(), should there be?
>> >
>> > I'm not using rcu safe list manipulation. What makes it look like
>> > rcu_read_lock() is safe?
>>
>> Indeed. I was looking at rcu_barrier() only. How about the patch below?
>
> With that, my genl patch can look like this:
>
> Subject: genetlink: make netns aware
>
> This makes generic netlink network namespace aware.
> No actual generic netlink families are made namespace
> aware, they need to be checked one by one and then
> set the family->netnsok member to true.
Are skb_clone and nlmsg_multicast really guaranteed not to sleep?
That seems like a lot of code and a lot of code paths.
Eric
--
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