From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Dichtel Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] netns: don't allocate an id for dead netns Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2015 10:39:53 +0200 Message-ID: <5520F4D9.5030103@6wind.com> References: <551E63B9.9050208@6wind.com> <1428055357-15289-1-git-send-email-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> <1428055357-15289-2-git-send-email-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> <20150403.123650.1819000124764491725.davem@davemloft.net> Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:33889 "EHLO mail-wg0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751412AbbDEIj4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Apr 2015 04:39:56 -0400 Received: by wgbdm7 with SMTP id dm7so6029116wgb.1 for ; Sun, 05 Apr 2015 01:39:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150403.123650.1819000124764491725.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 03/04/2015 18:36, David Miller a =E9crit : > From: Nicolas Dichtel > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:02:37 +0200 > >> First, let's explain the problem. >> Suppose you have an ipip interface that stands in the netns foo and = its link >> part in the netns bar (so the netns bar has an nsid into the netns f= oo). >> Now, you remove the netns bar: >> - the bar nsid into the netns foo is removed >> - the netns exit method of ipip is called, thus our ipip iface is = removed: >> =3D> a netlink message is built in the netns foo to advertise th= is deletion >> =3D> this netlink message requests an nsid for bar, thus a new n= sid is >> allocated for bar and never removed. >> >> This patch adds a check in peernet2id() so that an id cannot be allo= cated for >> a netns which is currently destroyed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel > > Applied. > I don't see these patches in your tree, maybe you forget to push them o= n kernel.org? My other series will conflict with these patches, is it possible to mer= ge net into net-next after them?