netdev - Re: [RFC(v2) net-next 13/13] ipv6: Complete neighbour entry removal from dst

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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <50F6B373.5040106@linux-ipv6.org>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 23:04:35 +0900
From:	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
To:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC(v2) net-next 13/13] ipv6: Complete neighbour entry removal
 from dst_entry.

Cong Wang wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 12:46 AM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>> +#if 0
>>   		if (rt->n && rt->n->dev == dev) {
>>   			rt->n->dev = loopback_dev;
>>   			dev_hold(loopback_dev);
>>   			dev_put(dev);
>>   		}
>> +#endif
> 
> Why commenting this out instead of removing it? As rt->n is totally
> removed, how possible could we reuse this code in future?

I have confirmed that this dev_put()/dev_hold() operation are really
for neigh->dev, which has refcnt for dev, so I agree.

(This is why I need to revisit refcnt 

--yoshfuji
--
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