On 10/20/09, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
quoted text
> Cyrill Gorcunov a écrit :
>> On 10/20/09, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Michal Ostrowski a écrit :
>>>> Access of po->pppoe_dev is guarded by sk->sk_state & PPPOX_CONNECTED,
>>>> and all use cases now rely on the socket lock.  Because of this, the
>>>> ref-count on the namespace held by the socket object suffices to hold
>>>> the namespace in existence and so we don't need to ref-count the
>>>> namespace in PPPoE. The flush_lock is gone.
>>>>
>>> Seems good !
>>>
>>> But can we use lock_sock() in __pppoe_xmit() context ?
>>>
>>
>> Eric, most probably i miss something, but how lock sock protect us
>> from mtu changed via sysfs. This action calls change mtu notifier
>> which doesn't care about sockets at all...
>
> This ultimately calls pppoe_flush_dev() and this function
> takes care of taking appropriate sock_locks() on each sockets ?
>
This hold and lock socks but set pppoe_dev to null as well. I'll back
later. And i need to reread the code.
--
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