Re: [PATC net-next] tcp: must block bh in __inet_twsk_hashdance()

2016-05-04 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 17:06 -0400, David Miller wrote: > I pushed them in by hand, they should really be there now. > > Thanks for letting me know. Thanks David Further tests show two additional missing local_bh_disable() protections around percpu_counter_dec() and one

Re: [PATC net-next] tcp: must block bh in __inet_twsk_hashdance()

2016-05-04 Thread David Miller
From: Eric Dumazet Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 11:22:11 -0700 > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 00:54 -0400, David Miller wrote: >> From: Eric Dumazet >> Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 17:10:50 -0700 >> >> > From: Eric Dumazet >> > >> >

Re: [PATC net-next] tcp: must block bh in __inet_twsk_hashdance()

2016-05-04 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 00:54 -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 17:10:50 -0700 > > > From: Eric Dumazet > > > > __inet_twsk_hashdance() might be called from process context, > > better block BH before acquiring

Re: [PATC net-next] tcp: must block bh in __inet_twsk_hashdance()

2016-05-03 Thread David Miller
From: Eric Dumazet Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 17:10:50 -0700 > From: Eric Dumazet > > __inet_twsk_hashdance() might be called from process context, > better block BH before acquiring bind hash and established locks > > Fixes: c10d9310edf5 ("tcp: do not

[PATC net-next] tcp: must block bh in __inet_twsk_hashdance()

2016-05-03 Thread Eric Dumazet
From: Eric Dumazet __inet_twsk_hashdance() might be called from process context, better block BH before acquiring bind hash and established locks Fixes: c10d9310edf5 ("tcp: do not assume TCP code is non preemptible") Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet ---