[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF2d9jh=H1O4JR3u=Rs3ODuQRF-Qp2wzzhAVf3PQ_f_Ox98eKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:11:00 -0700
From: Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
<maheshb@...gle.com>
To: Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com>
Cc: linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Petar Bozhidarov Penkov <ppenkov@...nford.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH,v2,net-next 1/2] tun: enable NAPI for TUN/TAP driver
> #ifdef CONFIG_TUN_VNET_CROSS_LE
> static inline bool tun_legacy_is_little_endian(struct tun_struct *tun)
> {
> @@ -541,6 +604,11 @@ static void __tun_detach(struct tun_file *tfile, bool clean)
>
> tun = rtnl_dereference(tfile->tun);
>
> + if (tun && clean) {
> + tun_napi_disable(tun, tfile);
are we missing synchronize_net() separating disable and del calls?
> + tun_napi_del(tun, tfile);
> + }
> +
> if (tun && !tfile->detached) {
> u16 index = tfile->queue_index;
> BUG_ON(index >= tun->numqueues);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists