1. 26 3月, 2008 25 次提交
  2. 25 3月, 2008 2 次提交
    • K
    • P
      [NEIGH]: Fix race between pneigh deletion and ipv6's ndisc_recv_ns (v3). · fa86d322
      Pavel Emelyanov 提交于
      Proxy neighbors do not have any reference counting, so any caller
      of pneigh_lookup (unless it's a netlink triggered add/del routine)
      should _not_ perform any actions on the found proxy entry. 
      
      There's one exception from this rule - the ipv6's ndisc_recv_ns() 
      uses found entry to check the flags for NTF_ROUTER.
      
      This creates a race between the ndisc and pneigh_delete - after 
      the pneigh is returned to the caller, the nd_tbl.lock is dropped 
      and the deleting procedure may proceed.
      
      One of the fixes would be to add a reference counting, but this
      problem exists for ndisc only. Besides such a patch would be too 
      big for -rc4.
      
      So I propose to introduce a __pneigh_lookup() which is supposed
      to be called with the lock held and use it in ndisc code to check
      the flags on alive pneigh entry.
      
      
      Changes from v2:
      As David noticed, Exported the __pneigh_lookup() to ipv6 module. 
      The checkpatch generates a warning on it, since the EXPORT_SYMBOL 
      does not follow the symbol itself, but in this file all the 
      exports come at the end, so I decided no to break this harmony.
      
      Changes from v1:
      Fixed comments from YOSHIFUJI - indentation of prototype in header
      and the pndisc_check_router() name - and a compilation fix, pointed
      by Daniel - the is_routed was (falsely) considered as uninitialized
      by gcc.
      Signed-off-by: NPavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      fa86d322
  3. 24 3月, 2008 3 次提交
  4. 23 3月, 2008 6 次提交
  5. 22 3月, 2008 3 次提交
  6. 21 3月, 2008 1 次提交
    • J
      [NET] ifb: set separate lockdep classes for queue locks · 94833dfb
      Jarek Poplawski 提交于
      [   10.536424] =======================================================
      [   10.536424] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      [   10.536424] 2.6.25-rc3-devel #3
      [   10.536424] -------------------------------------------------------
      [   10.536424] swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
      [   10.536424]  (&dev->queue_lock){-+..}, at: [<c0299b4a>] 
      dev_queue_xmit+0x175/0x2f3
      [   10.536424]
      [   10.536424] but task is already holding lock:
      [   10.536424]  (&p->tcfc_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8a67154>] tcf_mirred+0x20/0x178 
      [act_mirred]
      [   10.536424]
      [   10.536424] which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      lockdep warns of locking order while using ifb with sch_ingress and
      act_mirred: ingress_lock, tcfc_lock, queue_lock (usually queue_lock
      is at the beginning). This patch is only to tell lockdep that ifb is
      a different device (e.g. from eth) and has its own pair of queue
      locks. (This warning is a false-positive in common scenario of using
      ifb; yet there are possible situations, when this order could be
      dangerous; lockdep should warn in such a case.) (With suggestions by
      David S. Miller)
      Reported-and-tested-by: NDenys Fedoryshchenko <denys@visp.net.lb>
      Signed-off-by: NJarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
      Acked-by: NJamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      94833dfb