From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [Patch net] ipv6,mcast: always hold idev->lock before mca_lock Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:46:43 +0200 Message-ID: <20130628104643.GD15799@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <1367998914-26423-1-git-send-email-amwang@redhat.com> <20130626225809.GB26180@order.stressinduktion.org> <1372302584.26333.2.camel@cr0> <20130627034204.GB18553@order.stressinduktion.org> <51CD2C7F.5060200@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Cong Wang , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , "David S. Miller" To: Ding Tianhong Return-path: Received: from s15338416.onlinehome-server.info ([87.106.68.36]:43232 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755191Ab3F1Kqp (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:46:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51CD2C7F.5060200@huawei.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 02:26:07PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > On 2013/6/27 11:42, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:09:44AM +0800, Cong Wang wrote: > >> On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 00:58 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > >>> I do confirm that if this last hunk is applied the idev->addr_list > >>> traversal > >>> is safe. > >>> > >>> Please let me know if no one is working on this, I would rebase it > >>> then. > >> > >> I will rebase my patch on latest net-next. I am assuming this patch > >> looks good to you... > > > > Yes, I am fine with the apporach you took. Perhaps you could describe > > why the non-idev-locked call to__ipv6_get_lladdr-call is ok in that place. > > > > Thanks a lot, > > > > Hannes > > > > > > > I think the problem is clear: > > [...] > > so i think it is clear to describe the reason. Sorry, I meant "...in a comment". ;) Greetings, Hannes