On Mittwoch, 26. April 2017 08:41:30 CEST Gao Feng wrote: > On Dienstag, 25. April 2017 20:03:20 CEST gfree.w...@foxmail.com wrote: > > From: Gao Feng <f...@ikuai8.com> > > > > Because the func batadv_softif_init_late allocate some resources and > > it would be invoked in register_netdevice. So we need to invoke the > > func batadv_softif_free instead of free_netdev to cleanup when fail > > to register_netdevice. > > I could be wrong, but shouldn't the destructor be replaced with > free_netdevice > and the batadv_softif_free (without the free_netdev) used as ndo_uninit? The > line you've changed should then be kept as free_netdevice. > > At least this seems to be important when using rtnl_newlink() instead of the > legacy sysfs netdev stuff from batman-adv. rtnl_newlink() would also only > call > free_netdevice and thus also not run batadv_softif_free. This seems to be > only > fixable by calling ndo_uninit. > > Sorry, I don't get you. > The net_dev is created in this func batadv_softif_create. > Why couldn't invoke batadv_softif_free to cleanup when fail to > register_netdevice? >
Because it is the legacy way to create the batadv interfaces and there is a
"new" one. The new way is to use rtnl link (see batadv_link_ops).
The rtnl linke (rtnl_newlink) would not benefit from your fix and therefore
still show the old behavior. I think a different fix is necessary to solve the
problem for both ways to create an batadv interface.
Kind regards,
Sven
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
