From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: PROBLEM: 2.6.11-rc2 hangs on bridge shutdown (br0) Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 20:10:44 -0800 Message-ID: <20050205201044.1b95f4e8.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20050131162201.GA1000@stilzchen.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> <20050205052407.GA17266@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050204213813.4bd642ad.davem@davemloft.net> <20050205061110.GA18275@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050204221344.247548cb.davem@davemloft.net> <20050205064643.GA29758@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mirko.parthey@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, shemminger@osdl.org To: Herbert Xu In-Reply-To: <20050205064643.GA29758@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 17:46:43 +1100 Herbert Xu wrote: > This doesn't work because net/core/dst.c can only search based > on dst->dev. For the split device case, dst->dev is set to > loopback_dev while rt6i_idev is set to the real device. Indeed. I didn't catch that. > If we wanted to preserve the split device semantics, then we > can create a local GC list in IPv6 so that it can search based > on rt6i_idev as well as the other keys. Ok, so this would entail changing each ipv6 dst_free() call into one to ip6_dst_free(), which would: ip6_garbage_add(dst); dst_free(dst); It would mean that dst_run_gc() would need to have some callback like dst->ops->gc_destroy() or similar, which would allow ipv6 to delete the dst from it's local garbage list. > Alternatively we can > remove the dst->dev == dev check in dst_dev_event and dst_ifdown > and move that test down to the individual ifdown functions. I think there is a hole in this idea.... maybe. If the idea is to scan dst_garbage_list down in ipv6 specific code, you can't do that since 'dst' objects from every pool in the kernel get put onto the dst_garbage_list. It is generic. They have no identity, so it's illegal to treat any member of that list as an rt_entry, rt6_entry or any specific higher level dst type.