On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <j...@mojatatu.com> wrote: > On 17-10-18 12:43 PM, Cong Wang wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Chris Mi <chr...@mellanox.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> You listed 3 problems, and you think they are 3 different ones, here >> I argue problem 3 (using RCU callbacks) is the cause of problem 1 >> (refcnt not atomic). This is why I mentioned I have been thinking about >> removing RCU callbacks, because it probably could fix all of them. >> > > Cong, > Given this is a known bug (the test case Chris presented crashes the > kernel) - would it make sense to have a patch that goes to -net > to fix this while your approach and discussion outcome goes into > net-next?
I am not sure. Because Chris' patchset is large too and I don't think it could fix all crashes, so it has little value to just apply them for -net.
