From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] update rwlock initialization for nat_table Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:18:29 -0800 Message-ID: <20081211141829.cda39684.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <49400B7F.7040607@cosmosbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dada1@cosmosbay.com, mingo@elte.hu, acme@ghostprotocols.net, davem@davemloft.net To: Steven Rostedt Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:44567 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754339AbYLKWS4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:18:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:06:00 -0500 (EST) Steven Rostedt wrote: > > The following patch is in: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-2.6-trace.git > > branch: cleanups > > > Steven Rostedt (1): > update rwlock initialization for nat_table > > ---- > net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_rule.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > --------------------------- > commit d4175059c8f95e4cd58e0efaa85610ca59469fbd > Author: Steven Rostedt > Date: Wed Dec 10 15:00:09 2008 -0500 > > update rwlock initialization for nat_table > > Impact: clean up It's more than a "cleanup"? > The commit e099a173573ce1ba171092aee7bb3c72ea686e59 > (netfilter: netns nat: per-netns NAT table) renamed the > nat_table from __nat_table to nat_table without updating the > __RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED(__nat_table.lock). > > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_rule.c b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_rule.c > index bea54a6..8d489e7 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_rule.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_rule.c > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static struct > static struct xt_table nat_table = { > .name = "nat", > .valid_hooks = NAT_VALID_HOOKS, > - .lock = __RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED(__nat_table.lock), > + .lock = __RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED(nat_table.lock), > .me = THIS_MODULE, > .af = AF_INET, > }; At present any lockdep messages relating to this lock will print the wrong name. So it's a nanobug, I think?