From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:45834 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751334AbeBZTIf (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 14:08:35 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 14:08:32 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20180226.140832.2168046240961864572.davem@davemloft.net>
To: dsahern@gmail.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, idosch@idosch.org,
        roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com,
        weiwan@google.com, kafai@fb.com, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 02/20] vrf: Move fib6_table into net_vrf
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180225194730.30063-3-dsahern@gmail.com>
References: <20180225194730.30063-1-dsahern@gmail.com>
        <20180225194730.30063-3-dsahern@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2018 11:47:12 -0800

> A later patch removes rt6i_table from rt6_info. Save the ipv6
> table for a VRF in net_vrf. fib tables can not be deleted so
> no reference counting or locking is required.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>

Is this change really OK all by itself?

Sure, you fix up the vrf code operating on such 'rt6' objects to
not dereference the ->rt6i_table.

But any other code whatsoever that looks at this rt6 object (dumping,
other operations in the ipv6 stack data or control plane, etc.) can
legitimately expect always to see a non-NULL value here.

I really don't see how this can be OK and leave your patch series
properly bisectable.

Thanks.