From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking bug in fib_semantics.c Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:35:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20060822103556.GA3262@ff.dom.local> References: <20060817093615.GA25553@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20060821081642.GA2637@ff.dom.local> <20060821.011703.78716718.davem@davemloft.net> <20060821110201.GA3674@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx10.go2.pl ([193.17.41.74]:44928 "EHLO poczta.o2.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932156AbWHVKc6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 06:32:58 -0400 To: David Miller Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060821110201.GA3674@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 01:02:01PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On 21-08-2006 10:17, David Miller wrote: > > From: Jarek Poplawski > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:16:43 +0200 > ... > > I was skeptical of this case too, until I checked how > > fib_release_info() was called. > > I overlooked this - so I've to sharpen my sight and look at it > again - now knowing it's there. ... Hello, I've found it at last but on that occasion I've got some doubt according to rcu_read_lock and rcu_call treatment: isn't it "illegal to block while in an RCU read-side section"? And I think it takes place in: fib_lookup(): from tb_insert (fn_hash_insert() or fn_trie_insert()), fib_create_info(), fib_check_nh() fn_trie_lookup(): like above, inet_addr_type(), tb_lookup() fib_rule_put(): like #1 above or #2 after tb_lookup(), fib_res_put() Shouldn't there be _bh also? Jarek P. PS: linux-2.6.18-rc4