Hi Pablo, On 2013/02/08 02:27, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Hi Gao, > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 09:57:30AM +0800, Gao feng wrote: >> We should add a lock protection when we free the skb, >> because it maybe used by ipt_ulog_packet right now. > > Did you hit a reproducible crash? > I didn't. I looked at the ebt_ulog.c and found ebt_ulog_fini uses the spin lock to protect the ulog_buff's skb. > I think this is very unlikely to happen. The removal of the module > happens in user-context and the entire path to build and deliver the > skb to user-space is protected is under spin_lock_bh, so scheduling > is not possible. > Doesn't spin_lock_bh only disable local cpu's bottom-half? the task that remove the modules can run on other cpus at the same time. I'm wrong? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
