From: Kirill Tkhai
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 15:55:15 +0300
> Could you please clarify the status or what I should do with the patchset
> (because it's not clear for me)?
Please resend.
Hi, David,
I see the status of patchset has changed on
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/851928/
and now it is "Changes Requested".
There was Eric's reply, and my reply on his message. After that there wasn't
objections on
my reply or other patches.
Could you please clarify the status or what
Hi, Eric,
On 21.12.2017 20:39, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Kirill Tkhai writes:
>
>> peernet2id_alloc() is racy without rtnl_lock() as atomic_read(&peer->count)
>> under net->nsid_lock does not guarantee, peer is alive:
>>
>> rcu_read_lock()
>> peernet2id_alloc()..
>>
Kirill Tkhai writes:
> peernet2id_alloc() is racy without rtnl_lock() as atomic_read(&peer->count)
> under net->nsid_lock does not guarantee, peer is alive:
>
> rcu_read_lock()
> peernet2id_alloc()..
> spin_lock_bh(&net->nsid_lock) ..
> atomic_read(&p
peernet2id_alloc() is racy without rtnl_lock() as atomic_read(&peer->count)
under net->nsid_lock does not guarantee, peer is alive:
rcu_read_lock()
peernet2id_alloc()..
spin_lock_bh(&net->nsid_lock) ..
atomic_read(&peer->count) == 1 ..
.
