On 8/13/17 2:56 PM, Wei Wang wrote: >> Looking at my patch to move host routes from loopback to device with the >> address, I have this: >> >> @@ -2789,7 +2808,8 @@ static int fib6_ifdown(struct rt6_info *rt, void *arg) >> const struct arg_dev_net *adn = arg; >> const struct net_device *dev = adn->dev; >> >> - if ((rt->dst.dev == dev || !dev) && >> + if ((rt->dst.dev == dev || !dev || >> + (netdev_unregistering(dev) && rt->rt6i_idev->dev == dev)) && >> rt != adn->net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry && >> (rt->rt6i_nsiblings == 0 || >> (dev && netdev_unregistering(dev)) || > > As you explained earlier, after your patch, all entries in the fib6 > tree will have rt->dst.dev be the same as rt->rt6i_idev->dev except > those ones created by p6_rt_cache_alloc() and ip6_rt_pcpu_alloc(). > Then the above newly added check is mainly to catch those cached dst > entries (created by ip6_rt_cached_alloc()). right? > And it is required because __ipv6_ifa_notify() -> ip6_del_rt() won't > take care of those cached dst entries. > > Then I think I should wait for your patches to get merged before > submitting my patch? no. your patch will need to go back to 4.12; my changes will not be appropriate for that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
