On 12/18/2013 10:00 PM, Jiang Liu wrote: > According to documentation for netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev_rcu(), > caller should take RCU read lock, otherwise it will trigger following > warnings. The simplest fix is to protect with rcu_read_lock()/ > rcu_read_unlock(). And this solutions passes basic tests. > > Otherwise we may need to introduce netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev() > as netdev_lower_get_next_private(), which assumes the caller has > gained the lock to protect the list. > > Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <[email protected]> > ---
Jiang, The following patch addresses the same issue, http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/302711/ [net,1/5] net: allow netdev_all_upper_get_next_dev_rcu with rtnl lock held It is under review and solves the problem by having the call check for the rtnl lock as well. Take a look. I think it is a slightly better fix in that it doesn't clutter the driver with unnecessary rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() calls. Thanks, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
