From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 22:56:26 +0300
> On 21/04/17 22:50, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: >> On 21/04/17 22:36, David Miller wrote: >>> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> >>> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 21:30:42 +0300 >>> >>>> On 21/04/17 20:42, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: >>>>> Andrey Konovalov reported a BUG caused by the ip6mr code which is caused >>>>> because we call unregister_netdevice_many for a device that is already >>>>> being destroyed. In IPv4's ipmr that has been resolved by two commits >>>>> long time ago by introducing the "notify" parameter to the delete >>>>> function and avoiding the unregister when called from a notifier, so >>>>> let's do the same for ip6mr. >>> ... >>>> +CC LKML and Linus >>> >>> Applied, thanks Nikolay and thanks Andrey for the report and testing. >>> >>> Nikolay, how far does this bug go back? >>> >> >> Good question, AFAICS since ip6mr exists because it was copied from ipmr: >> commit 7bc570c8b4f7 >> Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshf...@linux-ipv6.org> >> Date: Thu Apr 3 09:22:53 2008 +0900 >> >> [IPV6] MROUTE: Support multicast forwarding. >> >> > > Oops no, my bad. That wouldn't cause it to BUG because it was already removed > by mif6_delete > earlier. So since it can be destroyed by a netns exiting, currently I don't > see any other > way which is outside of ip6mr for destroying that device. > > That should be: > commit 8229efdaef1e > Author: Benjamin Thery <benjamin.th...@bull.net> > Date: Wed Dec 10 16:30:15 2008 -0800 > > netns: ip6mr: enable namespace support in ipv6 multicast forwarding code > > > Which allowed the notifier to be executed for pimreg devices in other network > namespaces. That still makes it -stable material as far as I'm concerned. Thanks again! :)
