[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1404911849.3515.28.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 15:17:29 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
Cc: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>,
Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>,
Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: Do not try to send packets over dead link in
TLB mode.
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 14:04 +0200, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 12:25:43PM +0200, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> >On 07/09/2014 12:24 PM, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 06:09:58PM -0700, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> ...snip...
> >>> + spin_lock(&bond_info->slave_arr_lock);
> >>
> >> I don't think you can re-enter bond_alb_handle_link_change(), as it's
> >> protected either by rtnl or write-lock curr_active_slave.
> >>
> >Actually a very good catch :-)
> >Maybe the allocation above should be done with GFP_ATOMIC.
>
> For the record - it's indeed always under rtnl, so ASSERT_RTNL() (from your
> other email) is a good idea.
Strange. I basically suggested the ASSERT_RTNL() to Mahesh few days ago
and he tried this. But the assert triggered with miimon, so Mahesh added
back the spinlock.
--
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