[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090703083501.GA25536@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:35:01 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: dwmw2@...radead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
johannes@...solutions.net
Subject: Re: tun netns BUG()
Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>
> --- linux-2.6.28.x86_64-old/drivers/net/tun.c 2009-05-06 15:01:56.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.28.x86_64/drivers/net/tun.c 2009-05-06 15:10:09.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1194,21 +1194,22 @@
> static int tun_chr_close(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> struct tun_file *tfile = file->private_data;
> - struct tun_struct *tun = __tun_get(tfile);
> + struct tun_struct *tun;
>
>
> + rtnl_lock();
> + tun = __tun_get(tfile);
> if (tun) {
> DBG(KERN_INFO "%s: tun_chr_close\n", tun->dev->name);
>
> - rtnl_lock();
> __tun_detach(tun);
>
> /* If desireable, unregister the netdevice. */
> if (!(tun->flags & TUN_PERSIST))
> unregister_netdevice(tun->dev);
>
> - rtnl_unlock();
> }
> + rtnl_unlock();
Sorry, catching up with emails (hmm, maybe I should stop doing
that and read some new emails :)
This just turns a wide-open race into a less likely one (that's
why it appears to fix the problem). The crux of the issue is that
__tun_get(tfile) != NULL has nothing to do with whether the device
has been unregistered.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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