From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Hendry Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] NET: wan/x25_asy, move lapb_unregister to x25_asy_close_tty Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 10:39:23 +1100 Message-ID: References: <1290642894-4577-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> <20101125225659.GA13807@build.ihdev.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Jiri Slaby , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jirislaby@gmail.com, Mikhail Ulyanov To: Sergey Lapin Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20101125225659.GA13807@build.ihdev.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Looks like some more X.25 users. Not sure on your usage, but I should point out: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/332981/ X.25 protocol needs to have the big kernel lock removed so it can stay around in the future. I have been working through them, but there are still some of the more complex ones remaining. The test setups I am using are: Sockets<->X25<->x25loop<->X25<->Sockets Sockets<->X25<->xotd<->network<->xotd<->X25<->Sockets and I know some users have: Sockets<->X25<->xotd<->network<->CiscoXOT<->devices. Where x25loop is a userspace tun device which shuffles the LCIs, does some basic call handling and loops the calls back into kernel X25. xotd is a basic implementation of the X25 over TCP RFC. Are you using something like this? Sockets<->X25<->lapb<->x25_async<->..... If you are using X25 I would be interested to see how your setup goes with the X25 BKL cleanup work, and if anyone wanted to help with the remaining BKLs :) On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Sergey Lapin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 12:54:54AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> We register lapb when tty is created, but unregister it only when the >> device is UP. So move the lapb_unregister to x25_asy_close_tty after >> the device is down. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby >> Reported-by: Sergey Lapin >> Cc: Andrew Hendry > Tested-by: Sergey Lapin > Tested-by: Mikhail Ulyanov >