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.
png' alt='cgit logo'/>
Merge tag 'rtc-4.10-2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/abelloni/linux
Pull RTC fix from Alexandre Belloni:
"A single fix for this cycle. It is worth taking it for 4.10 so that
distributions will not have CONFIG_RTC_DRV_JZ4740 switching from m to
y in their config.
Summary:
- Allow jz4740 to build as a module again by using kernel_halt()"
* tag 'rtc-4.10-2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/abelloni/linux:
rtc: jz4740: make the driver buildable as a module again