On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22.09.2016 15:03, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 13:03 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> net/core/net_namespace.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/net/core/net_namespace.c b/net/core/net_namespace.c >>> index 2c2eb1b629b11d..a2ace299f28355 100644 >>> --- a/net/core/net_namespace.c >>> +++ b/net/core/net_namespace.c >>> @@ -758,9 +758,11 @@ static int __init net_ns_init(void) >>> >>> register_pernet_subsys(&net_ns_ops); >>> >>> + rtnl_lock(); >>> rtnl_register(PF_UNSPEC, RTM_NEWNSID, rtnl_net_newid, NULL, NULL); >>> rtnl_register(PF_UNSPEC, RTM_GETNSID, rtnl_net_getid, rtnl_net_dumpid, >>> NULL); >>> + rtnl_unlock(); >>> >>> return 0; >>> } >> >> Hi Hannes >> >> Why is this needed here, and not in other places ? > > I found this during working on the file and actually saw no live issues > (belonged to another series which I just split up). > > I don't think it is a big issue but wanted the writes to the > rtnl_msg_handlers array to be strictly serialized. I was working on > adding this to other places, too. Maybe better for net-next even?
But they are called during boot, why is it possible to have a parallel reader/writer at that time?
