From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net] vxlan: add necessary locking on device removal Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 12:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20130717.120928.1926577285896040401.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20130716.230600.734017943782172716.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: pshelar@nicira.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:52505 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756861Ab3GQTJ3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:09:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Pravin Shelar Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:41:33 -0700 > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:06 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: Pravin Shelar >> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:29:08 -0700 >> >>> commit 1c51a9159ddefa51 (vxlan: fix race caused by dropping >>> rtnl_unlock) moved sock-create to sock_work workq. Thats why I thought >>> sock_work takes RTNL. but if it is not taking RTNL in any case, they >>> why vxlan sock create is deferred to sock_work? >> >> That commit is handling the fact that the RTNL mutex is NOT held >> during the create operation in question. >> >> It defers to a workqueue so that the new ->sock_lock can be taken >> in the appropriate context. > > ok, Thanks for explanation. I do not see any problem with the patch. Great, I'm going to apply Stephen's patch then. Thanks.