On 07/23/2015 07:13 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:05:56 +0200 > Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 07/23/2015 06:59 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 09:07:37 -0700 >>> Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> + /* Stop hello and hold timer */ >>>> + spin_lock_bh(&br->lock); >>>> + del_timer(&br->hello_timer); >>>> + list_for_each_entry(p, &br->port_list, list) >>>> + del_timer(&p->hold_timer); >>>> + spin_unlock_bh(&br->lock); >>> >>> Wouldn't it be easier to use del_timer_sync here? >>> >> I think it should work. Also I have an error in the commit message >> about the kernel BPDU sending which I need to correct. I'll prepare >> a v2 with your suggestion and fixed commit message. > > The one thing to watch out for with del_timer_sync is that > the timer routine and the caller can't be using the same lock > otherwise timer will be spinning waiting to get lock that > is held by caller who is waiting for timer. > Actually I just noticed the locking was wrong in the patch, also we should use del_timer() only because a spin_lock is acquired before that and cannot use the blocking del_timer_sync() inside. I'll fix it all up in the second version.
