On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 09:57:42AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 2/25/19 9:39 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >>> On 02/24/2019 08:12 PM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> >>>> ipv6_mod_enabled() is more safe and gentle to check if ipv6 is disabled
> >>>> at running time.
> >>>
> >>> Why is it better exactly ?
> >>>
> >>> IPv6 can be enabled on the host, but disabled per device
> >>>
> >>> /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/{name}/disable_ipv6
> >>
> >> Sorry, it looks I didn't make it clear in the commit description.
> >> This issue only occurs when IPv6 is disabled at boot time as there is
> >> no IPv6 route entry. Disable ipv6 on specific interface is not affected.
> >> So check ipv6_mod_enabled() is enough and we don't need to worry about
> >> the rcu_read_lock or the dev status.
> >>
> >> Should I update the commit description?
> >
> > Certainly. Are you telling us skb->dev could be NULL here ?
> >
> > Because rcu_read_lock() should already be asserted.
> >
>
> Same response as geneve. The existing check is more appropriate and
> relevant for the code path: is ipv6 enabled on this device versus is
> ipv6 enabled at all.
Hi David,
Just as I said, this issue only occurs when IPv6 is disabled at boot time
as there is no IPv6 route entry. Disable ipv6 on specific interface should
not be affected(IPv6 route/fib has inited). So I think use ipv6_mod_enabled()
would be more suitable in this scenario. Did I miss something?
Thanks
Hangbin
