On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:08:44PM +0200, Guillaume Nault wrote:
> if (po) {
> struct sock *sk = sk_pppox(po);
>
> - bh_lock_sock(sk);
> -
> - /* If the user has locked the socket, just ignore
> - * the packet. With the way two rcv protocols hook into
> - * one socket family type, we cannot (easily) distinguish
> - * what kind of SKB it is during backlog rcv.
> - */
> - if (sock_owned_by_user(sk) == 0) {
> - /* We're no longer connect at the PPPOE layer,
> - * and must wait for ppp channel to disconnect us.
> - */
> - sk->sk_state = PPPOX_ZOMBIE;
> - }
> -
> - bh_unlock_sock(sk);
> if (!schedule_work(&po->proto.pppoe.padt_work))
> sock_put(sk);
> }
>
Finally, I think I'll keep this approach for net-next, to completely
remove PPPOX_ZOMBIE.
For now, let's just avoid any assumption about the relationship between
the PPPOX_ZOMBIE state and the value of po->pppoe_dev, as suggested by
Matt.
Denys, can you let me know if your issue goes away with the following
patch?
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c b/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c
index 2ed7506..5e0b432 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c
@@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ static int pppoe_release(struct socket *sock)
po = pppox_sk(sk);
- if (sk->sk_state & (PPPOX_CONNECTED | PPPOX_BOUND | PPPOX_ZOMBIE)) {
+ if (po->pppoe_dev) {
dev_put(po->pppoe_dev);
po->pppoe_dev = NULL;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
