1. 08 11月, 2008 2 次提交
  2. 06 11月, 2008 1 次提交
    • E
      net: Guaranetee the proper ordering of the loopback device. · ae33bc40
      Eric W. Biederman 提交于
      I was recently hunting a bug that occurred in network namespace
      cleanup.  In looking at the code it became apparrent that we have
      and will continue to have cases where if we have anything going
      on in a network namespace there will be assumptions that the
      loopback device is present.   Things like sending igmp unsubscribe
      messages when we bring down network devices invokes the routing
      code which assumes that at least the loopback driver is present.
      
      Therefore to avoid magic initcall ordering hackery that is hard
      to follow and hard to get right insert a call to register the
      loopback device directly from net_dev_init().    This guarantes
      that the loopback device is the first device registered and
      the last network device to go away.
      Signed-off-by: NEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      ae33bc40
  3. 04 11月, 2008 1 次提交
  4. 31 10月, 2008 1 次提交
  5. 16 8月, 2008 3 次提交
  6. 18 7月, 2008 1 次提交
  7. 26 3月, 2008 1 次提交
  8. 29 1月, 2008 1 次提交
  9. 13 1月, 2008 1 次提交
  10. 13 11月, 2007 1 次提交
  11. 27 10月, 2007 1 次提交
    • E
      [NET]: Marking struct pernet_operations __net_initdata was inappropriate · 2b008b0a
      Eric W. Biederman 提交于
      It is not safe to to place struct pernet_operations in a special section.
      We need struct pernet_operations to last until we call unregister_pernet_subsys.
      Which doesn't happen until module unload.
      
      So marking struct pernet_operations is a disaster for modules in two ways.
      - We discard it before we call the exit method it points to.
      - Because I keep struct pernet_operations on a linked list discarding
        it for compiled in code removes elements in the middle of a linked
        list and does horrible things for linked insert.
      
      So this looks safe assuming __exit_refok is not discarded
      for modules.
      Signed-off-by: NEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      2b008b0a
  12. 16 10月, 2007 1 次提交
  13. 11 10月, 2007 12 次提交
  14. 31 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  15. 26 4月, 2007 7 次提交
  16. 04 1月, 2007 1 次提交
  17. 20 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  18. 19 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  19. 29 9月, 2006 1 次提交
  20. 14 9月, 2006 1 次提交