Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751274AbVJaBoa (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:44:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751211AbVJaBo3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:44:29 -0500 Received: from send.forptr.21cn.com ([202.105.45.51]:6893 "HELO 21cn.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751272AbVJaBo2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:44:28 -0500 Message-ID: <4365775B.9080209@21cn.com> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:46:03 +0800 From: Yan Zheng User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-6 (X11/20050513) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Stevens CC: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][MCAST]IPv6: doubt about ipv6_sk_mc_lock usage. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AIMC-AUTH: yanzheng X-AIMC-MAILFROM: yanzheng@21cn.com X-AIMC-Msg-ID: rVAlY6OB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1022 Lines: 25 David Stevens wrote: > 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 Thanks. I have one more question. Why ip6_mc_source() uses read_lock_bh(&ipv6_sk_mc_lock) and ip6_mc_msfilter() doesn't use ipv6_sk_mc_lock at all. when ipv6_mc_list's sflist are accessed by inet6_mc_check(), Can it be modified by ip6_mc_source() or ip6_mc_msfilter() ? (For example ipv6_mc_list's sflist is freed up by sock_kfree_s(), when inet6_mc_check() uses it) Regards - 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/