Do the ax25_list_lock, ax25_dev_lock, linkfail_lockreally, ax25_frag_lock and listen_lock have to be bh-safe? Do the netrom and rose locks have to be bh-safe? A device might be deleted after lookup in the SIOCADDRT ioctl but before it's being used. Routes to a device being taken down might be deleted by ax25_rt_device_down but added by somebody else before the device has been deleted fully. The ax25_rt_find_route synopsys is pervert but I somehow had to deal with the race caused by the static variable in it's previous implementation. Implement proper socket locking in netrom and rose. Check socket locking when ax25_rcv is sending to raw sockets. In particular ax25_send_to_raw() seems fishy. Heck - ax25_rcv is fishy. Handle XID and TEST frames properly. index : net-next.git
net-next plumbingsTobias Klauser
summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/net/8021q
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorIdo Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>2017-02-06 16:20:14 +0100
committerDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>2017-02-06 11:25:57 -0500
commita8eca326151ee1beac82a4fd86d9edad3a37aaed (patch)
tree78be26268b991ac647680cde9c968d924f912dbd /net/8021q
parent5c8802f14a0679e970e7b25f809a12c3ae1a873d (diff)
net: remove ndo_neigh_{construct, destroy} from stacked devices
In commit 18bfb924f000 ("net: introduce default neigh_construct/destroy ndo calls for L2 upper devices") we added these ndos to stacked devices such as team and bond, so that calls will be propagated to mlxsw. However, previous commit removed the reliance on these ndos and no new users of these ndos have appeared since above mentioned commit. We can therefore safely remove this dead code. Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Diffstat (limited to 'net/8021q')
-rw-r--r--net/8021q/vlan_dev.c2
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c