From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] bonding: add port protection for bond_3ad_xxx_change() Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:53:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20131218.165320.513139543099757450.davem@davemloft.net> References: <52AAD36B.40103@huawei.com> <28416.1386973562@death.nxdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dingtianhong@huawei.com, andy@greyhouse.net, vfalico@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: fubar@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:56978 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753945Ab3LRVxZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:53:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <28416.1386973562@death.nxdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jay Vosburgh Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 14:26:02 -0800 > Ding Tianhong wrote: > >>Jay Vosburgh said that the bond_3ad_adapter_speed_changed and >>bond_3ad_adapter_duplex_changed is called with RTNL only, and >>the functions will modify the port's information with no further >>locking, they will not mutex against bond state machine and >>incoming LACPDU which do not hold RTNL, So I add port lock to >>protect the port information. >> >>But they are not critical bugs, they exist since day one, and till >>now they have never been hit and reported, because change for speed >>and duplex is very rare, and will not occur critical problem. >> >>The comments in the function is very old, cleanup the comments together. > > For entire series: > > Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh Series applied, thanks.