On Sunday, 1 June 2025 15:10:50 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > So, even getting the parent (see `ASSERT_RTNL` in > `netdev_master_upper_dev_get`) of the lower interface is a no-go at that > point.
I didn't want to say here that this specific operation is necessary here. Just
wanted to point out that operating on these data structures might not always
be possible at that point. This is why I tried to point out that it might be
better to have something "good enough" using RCU which is managed outside this
context (write-only protected using rtnl_lock).
The idea of having something specific to meshif that still manages to detect
(beforehand) if there's a path to `batadv_interface_tx` - while `skb_iif`
remains set to a specific interface along the way - sounds like an
implementation nightmare to me.
Kind regards,
Sven
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
