Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751095AbVJ3RcI (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:32:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751094AbVJ3RcI (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:32:08 -0500 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:44947 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751089AbVJ3RcH (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:32:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4364EA58.7040707@21cn.com> To: Yan Zheng Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH][MCAST]IPv6: doubt about ipv6_sk_mc_lock usage. X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.2CF1 June 9, 2003 Message-ID: From: David Stevens Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:32:14 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM121/03/M/IBM(Release 6.53HF654 | July 22, 2005) at 10/30/2005 10:32:19, Serialize complete at 10/30/2005 10:32:19 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 937 Lines: 30 No, ipv6_sk_mc_lock is required for join and leave to protect inet6_mc_check() calls, and modifications to the filter list only happen via ioctls that are protected by the socket lock. I don't think any of these changes are correct. +-DLS netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote on 10/30/2005 07:44:24 AM: > Hello. > > I think ipv6_sk_mc_lock should protest both ipv6_mc_list and it's sflist. > because they can are used by > inet6_mc_check(...) in softirq and be modified by ip6_mc_source(...) or > ip6_mc_msfilter(...) simultaneity. > I also remove read_lock when traverse ipv6_mc_list, because it's protected by > lock_sock(sk). > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/