Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:57:21 +0100 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] [patch 3/6] [Network namespace] Network devices isolation |
| |
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 11:02:05PM +0200, dlezcano@fr.ibm.com wrote: > struct net_device *dev_get_by_name(const char *name) > { > + struct net_ns_dev_list *dev_list = &(net_ns()->dev_list); > struct net_device *dev; > > - read_lock(&dev_base_lock); > + read_lock(&dev_list->lock); > dev = __dev_get_by_name(name); > if (dev) > dev_hold(dev); > - read_unlock(&dev_base_lock); > + read_unlock(&dev_list->lock); > return dev;
And what would stop renames done via different lists from creating a conflict? Incidentally, WTF protects the device name while we are doing that lookup?
While we are at it, what are you going to do with sysfs? ls /sys/class/net and watch the fun... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |