On 02/02/17 15:53, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 14:42 +0000, Anoob Soman wrote:
I have tested both the approaches and LOCKDEP doesn't seem to catch any
problem with the test I was doing.
Yeah, I think I will cleanup this mess, we probably can remove rcu
locking in control path, and stick to a single mutex to reduce all this
lock complexity.
But that will be for net-next, while we need your fix for net tree.
Thanks.
Sorry, I didn't get it. You want me to post a patch for net tree,
changing the way we do dev_{add,remove}_pack(fanout_prot_hook) and you
will fix up the lock mess in net-next.
Thanks,
Anoob.
