[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369973531.5304.4.camel@cr0>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 12:12:11 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] vxlan: do real refcnt for vn_sock
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 20:56 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 10:55:45 +0800
> Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 16:39 +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 21:41 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > Why not just fix the requirement to drop rtnl when calling igmp.
> > > > The code comes out cleaner and safer as well.
> > >
> > > Besides you forget to lock the socket before calling _ip_mc_join_group()
> > > (and also the order is very important too), your patch doesn't fix the
> > > problem I met. The full backtrace is below:
> > >
> >
> > Hi, Stephen,
> >
> > Do you think my patch is an easier solution? It at least fixes the
> > crash, while your patch doesn't. :)
> >
> >
>
> No. your patch doesn't fix the real problem.
> The real fix is more complex because of how socket locking interacts with RTNL.
Yeah, I am thinking if we could replace the RTNL lock with a spinlock in
IPv4 multicast, as IPv6 multicast uses its own spin lock too. I don't
see any reason why inet->mc_list has to be protected by RTNL.
>
>
> I have been busy with health stuff, so the going is slow.
No problem, take care!
--
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