From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:20:15 -0700
>
>
> On 03/20/2018 10:11 AM, David Lebrun wrote:
>> On 20/03/18 15:07, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> This is not the proper fix.
>>>
>>> Control path holds RTNL and can sleeep if needed.
>>>
>>> RCU should be avoided
On 03/20/2018 10:11 AM, David Lebrun wrote:
> On 20/03/18 15:07, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> This is not the proper fix.
>>
>> Control path holds RTNL and can sleeep if needed.
>>
>> RCU should be avoided in lwtunnel_build_state()
>>
>
> +Roopa
>
> In lwtunnel_build_state(), the RCU protects the
On 20/03/18 15:07, Eric Dumazet wrote:
This is not the proper fix.
Control path holds RTNL and can sleeep if needed.
RCU should be avoided in lwtunnel_build_state()
+Roopa
In lwtunnel_build_state(), the RCU protects the lwtunnel_encap_ops "ops"
which is rcu-dereferenced. Moreover, the
On 03/20/2018 07:44 AM, David Lebrun wrote:
> From: David Lebrun
>
> The seg6_build_state() function is called with RCU read lock held,
> so we cannot use GFP_KERNEL. This patch uses GFP_ATOMIC instead.
>
>
> Fixes: 6c8702c60b886 ("ipv6: sr: add support for SRH
From: David Lebrun
The seg6_build_state() function is called with RCU read lock held,
so we cannot use GFP_KERNEL. This patch uses GFP_ATOMIC instead.
[ 92.770271] =
[ 92.770628] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 92.770921] 4.16.0-rc4+ #12 Not