On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:57 PM Eli Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:13:06AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 10:19 AM Eli Cohen wrote:
> >
> > so what are we protecting here against? someone removing the device
> > while the tc rule is being added?
> >
> Not necessairl
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:13:06AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 10:19 AM Eli Cohen wrote:
>
> so what are we protecting here against? someone removing the device
> while the tc rule is being added?
>
Not necessairly. In case of ecmp, the rule may be copied to another
eswitch.
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 10:19 AM Eli Cohen wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 12:33:58PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:24 AM Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > From: Eli Cohen
> > >
> > > Net devices might be removed. For example, a vxlan device could be
> > > deleted and its ifn
On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 12:33:58PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:24 AM Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > From: Eli Cohen
> >
> > Net devices might be removed. For example, a vxlan device could be
> > deleted and its ifnidex would become invalid. Use dev_get_by_index()
> > instead of
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:24 AM Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> From: Eli Cohen
>
> Net devices might be removed. For example, a vxlan device could be
> deleted and its ifnidex would become invalid. Use dev_get_by_index()
> instead of __dev_get_by_index() to hold reference on the device while
> accessing
From: Eli Cohen
Net devices might be removed. For example, a vxlan device could be
deleted and its ifnidex would become invalid. Use dev_get_by_index()
instead of __dev_get_by_index() to hold reference on the device while
accessing it and release after done.
Fixes: 3c37745ec614 ("net/mlx5e: Prop
