netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: request_module while holding rtnl semaphore

To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: request_module while holding rtnl semaphore
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 02:39:41 +0100
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <41916F0B.5010809@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <41899DCF.3050804@xxxxxxxxx> <E1CQDcP-0003ff-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041109161126.376f755c.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041110010113.GJ31969@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41916A91.3080107@xxxxxxxxx> <20041110012251.GK31969@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41916F0B.5010809@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
* Patrick McHardy <41916F0B.5010809@xxxxxxxxx> 2004-11-10 02:29
> Thomas Graf wrote:
> >The action code might load modules in the middle of a classifier
> >configuration and it will be very hard to reverse those changes.
> >Right now we could move it to the top of all configurations and it
> >would probably be possible to get back where we fetch the device
> >but it will get impossible once a classifier requires module
> >loading which is not unlikely.
> > 
> >
> Assuming all error-paths do proper cleanup, returning -EAGAIN
> should always result in the same configuration state as before.

I agree but this assumption is wrong, at least for u32. I agree
that once this is true it would work perfectly fine, however I 
think it would be inefficient to parse the whole TLV tree multiple
times.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>