From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:46:09 +0000

quoted text
> Actually, I, and earlier Herbert, have written about destroying root
> qdiscs without sch_tree_lock(). I don't know how Herbert, but I'd
> prefer to leave here this lock for child qdiscs: they can remove some
> common structures, so this needs more checking, and even if they don't
> do this currently, there is no need to remove this possibility here.
> Similarly, I'm not sure if removing BH protection is really needed
> here.

Well you don't really know if this happens or not for sure
do you? :-)

Why don't you go make sure of this and report back what you
find?  I see no reason to account for something that cannot
happen.

It's better to have a consistent rule for qdisc_destroy()
rather than a bunch of special cases that are hard to audit.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html