Patrick McHardy wrote:
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Patrick McHardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe I can save you some time: we used to do down_trylock()
for the rtnl mutex, so senders would simply return if someone
else was already processing the queue *or* the rtnl was locked
for some other
Denis V. Lunev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The presence of the message in the queue during rtnl_unlock is quite
possible as normal user-kernel message processing path for rtnl is the
following:
netlink_sendmsg
netlink_unicast
netlink_sendskb
skb_queue_tail
Hmm, so it looks like we do not need this queue processing at all...
Regards,
Den
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Patrick McHardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe I can save you some time: we used to do down_trylock()
for the rtnl mutex, so senders would simply return if someone
else was
