From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vasily Averin Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ipmr_free_table() should be called under taken rtnl_lock Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 14:46:34 +0300 Message-ID: <559D0D9A.6050401@virtuozzo.com> References: <559BF613.7090904@virtuozzo.com> <559C0B7E.8010108@virtuozzo.com> <559C120F.7020709@virtuozzo.com> <559CFB97.4020701@virtuozzo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Linux Kernel Network Developers , Hannes Frederic Sowa To: Cong Wang Return-path: Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.232.25]:36295 "EHLO relay.sw.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754251AbbGHLrb (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2015 07:47:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <559CFB97.4020701@virtuozzo.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08.07.2015 13:29, Vasily Averin wrote: > On 07.07.2015 20:53, Vasily Averin wrote: >> On 07.07.2015 20:30, Cong Wang wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Vasily Averin wrote: >>>> On 07.07.2015 20:13, Cong Wang wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Vasily Averin wrote: >>>>>> ipmr_free_table() calls unregister_netdevice_many() inside >>>>>> and changes net_todo_list protected by rtnl_lock >>>>> >>>>> Did you see any real bug? >>>> >>>> No, it was result of manual code review. >>>> >>>>> ipmr_free_table() is called in failure path, in this case there is no >>>>> device registered yet, so unregister should be just a nop? >>>> >>>> However may be it's better to mark this place for future anyway? >>> >>> Then add a comment there. ;) >> >> As you can see I'm not familiar with this code, >> so I would like to ask you to do it. :) > > Seems I've found a better idea: > to add ASSERT_RTNL() into unregister_netdevice_many() It was done already, there is ASSERT_RTNL() in rollback_registered_many() called from unregister_netdevice_many(). Please drop this patch, seems it isn't required.