David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote:
[...]
>> This was done historically in bonding, but the call to
>> bond_update_speed_duplex was removed in commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding:
>> don't call update_speed_duplex() under spinlocks"), as it might sleep
>> under lock. Later, the locking was changed to only hold RTNL, and so
>> after commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex()
>> under spinlocks") this call is again safe.
>>
>> Tested-by: "Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tanti...@intel.com>
>> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfal...@gmail.com>
>> Cc: dingtianhong <dingtianh...@huawei.com>
>> Fixes: 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex() under
>> spinlocks")
>> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosbu...@canonical.com>
>
>Applied, thanks Jay.
Rereading the above, I just noticed that I put the wrong commit
into the fixes tag (and the "Later, the locking was changed" text); the
correct fixes tag should be:
Fixes: 4cb4f97b7e36 ("bonding: rebuild the lock use for bond_mii_monitor()")
Kernels between 876254ae2758 and 4cb4f97b7e36 should not have
this patch applied, as it might sleep under lock.
Sorry for the error,
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosbu...@canonical.com
