On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>>> Now there is no lock protecting nlk ngroups/groups' accessing in
>>> netlink bind and getname. It's safe from nlk groups' setting in
>>> netl
On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>> Now there is no lock protecting nlk ngroups/groups' accessing in
>> netlink bind and getname. It's safe from nlk groups' setting in
>> netlink_release, but not from netlink_realloc_groups called
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> Now there is no lock protecting nlk ngroups/groups' accessing in
> netlink bind and getname. It's safe from nlk groups' setting in
> netlink_release, but not from netlink_realloc_groups called by
> netlink_setsockopt.
>
> netlink_lock_table is need
From: Xin Long
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 11:53:29 +0800
> Now there is no lock protecting nlk ngroups/groups' accessing in
> netlink bind and getname. It's safe from nlk groups' setting in
> netlink_release, but not from netlink_realloc_groups called by
> netlink_setsockopt.
>
> netlink_lock_table
