[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHA+R7MRhvwUcDqAPFRpO8JiEizp_EhUwKyK31MbfMOV=YpW7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:12:06 -0700
From: Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] fib: move fib_rules_cleanup_ops() under rtnl lock
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Alexander Duyck
<alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/30/2015 04:47 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
>>
>> As long as we agree rtnl lock should be taken, you already take my point
>> here ($subject says so).
>
>
> Yes, I agree lock can be held. For fib4 it was already holding the RTNL
> lock when it made that call. You can update the other users of
> fib_rules_unregister so that they call it with the RTNL lock held as well.
>
>> It is just API change to move rtnl_lock up to caller or whatever
>> appropriate.
>
>
> Right, so like I said for fib4 this is resolved. That just leaves ipmr,
> ip6mr, fib6, and dn_rules that need to be updated so that they correctly
> handle the RTNL locking in their exit/cleanup paths. Since you already have
> some related patches out for these I will let you take them otherwise I
> might try to go through and clean them up next week.
>
Ok, then we are finally on the same page. We need two patches:
1) move unregister under rtnl lock (as what this patch intended to do)
2) remove the unnecessary rules_mod_lock
Thanks.
--
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