Hi Paul,
af_can.c only provides an infrastructure for PF_CAN modules like can-raw.ko,
can-bcm.ko or can-isotp.ko.
Please take a look into can_notifier() in net/can/af_can.c and raw_notifier()
in net/can/raw.c:
The receivers are removed when the appropriate socket is closed that created
the belonging receivers. And you can not remove can.ko (af_can.c) when another
PF_CAN protocol like can-raw.ko is using it.
So when a netdev notifier removes the interface both the PF_CAN protocol (e.g.
can-raw.ko) and the PF_CAN core (af_can.c) cleans up all receivers and finally
removes the per-interface structure dev_rcv_lists (e.g. for can0).
In can_exit() all the dev_rcv_lists for ARPHRD_CAN interfaces are removed that
had been created by NETDEV_REGISTER notifier and are unused by any of the
PF_CAN protocols and therefore without any receivers attached to them.
The list is protected by spin_lock(&can_rcvlists_lock) - which is probably not
even needed in this particular case - and there is no PF_CAN protocol
registered at this time. So it's really save to remove the empty dev_rcv_lists
structs here that do not link to any receivers.
Puh - much text. But i hope it clarifies it.
Thinking about the rcu stuff again, rcu_barrier() still makes sense when you
are unloading the module chain of can-raw.ko and can.ko very fast.
Regards,
Oliver
--
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