David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think the thing to do is to just leave the loopback references
> in place, try to unregister the per-namespace loopback device,
> and that will safely wait for all the references to go away.
Right. The only thing I have found that needs to be changed
> Quoting Alexey Kuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
>
> > Does this look sane (untested)?
>
> It does not, unfortunately.
>
> Instead of regular crash in infiniband you will get numerous
> random N
Hello!
> I think the thing to do is to just leave the loopback references
> in place, try to unregister the per-namespace loopback device,
> and that will safely wait for all the references to go away.
Yes, it is exactly how it works in openvz. All the sockets are killed,
queues are cleared, nobo
Hello!
> Does this look sane (untested)?
It does not, unfortunately.
Instead of regular crash in infiniband you will get numerous
random NULL pointer dereferences both due to dst->neighbour
and due to dst->dev.
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the bo
Hello!
> Well I don't think the loopback device is currently but as soon
> as we get network namespace support we will have multiple loopback
> devices and they will get unregistered when we remove the network
> namespace.
There is no logical difference. At the moment when namespace is gone
there
From: ebiederman@lnxi.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:30:39 -0600
> Sure. In the network namespace case I think the careful ordering of the
> shutdown handles that case. Even with per network namespace lo
> unregistered it still existed until the network namespace actually
> e
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:42:34 +0200
>> > Hmm. Then the code moving dst->dev to point to the loopback
>> > device will have to be fixed too. I'll post a patch a bit later.
>>
>> Does this look sane (unte
> Quoting David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
>
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:42:34 +0200
>
> > > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin <[EM
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Why is neighbour->dev changed here?
>>
>> It holds reference to device and prevents its destruction.
>> If dst is held somewhere, we cannot destroy the device and deadlock
>> while unregister.
>
> BTW, can this ever happen for the loopback dev
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:42:34 +0200
> > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
> >
> > > Quoting Eric W. Biederman :
>
> Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
>
> > Quoting Eric W. Biederman :
> > Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
> >
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> Quoting Eric W. Biederman :
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: dst_ifdown breaks infiniband?
>
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > Why is neighbour->dev changed here?
> >>
> >> It holds reference to device
12 matches
Mail list logo
