Re: [PATCH v2 net] bonding: don't use stale speed and duplex information

[Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>]

David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
[...]
>> 	This was done historically in bonding, but the call to
>> bond_update_speed_duplex was removed in commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding:
>> don't call update_speed_duplex() under spinlocks"), as it might sleep
>> under lock.  Later, the locking was changed to only hold RTNL, and so
>> after commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex()
>> under spinlocks") this call is again safe.
>> 
>> Tested-by: "Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@intel.com>
>> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>
>> Cc: dingtianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>> Fixes: 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex() under spinlocks")
>> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
>
>Applied, thanks Jay.

	Rereading the above, I just noticed that I put the wrong commit
into the fixes tag (and the "Later, the locking was changed" text); the
correct fixes tag should be:

Fixes: 4cb4f97b7e36 ("bonding: rebuild the lock use for bond_mii_monitor()")

	Kernels between 876254ae2758 and 4cb4f97b7e36 should not have
this patch applied, as it might sleep under lock.

	Sorry for the error,

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@canonical.com