From eeaf61d8891f9c9ed12c1a667e72bf83f0857954 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: stephen hemminger Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:26:30 +0000 Subject: bridge: add rcu_read_lock on transmit Long ago, when bridge was converted to RCU, rcu lock was equivalent to having preempt disabled. RCU has changed a lot since then and bridge code was still assuming the since transmit was called with bottom half disabled, it was RCU safe. Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger Tested-by: Johannes Berg Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- net/bridge/br_fdb.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'net/bridge/br_fdb.c') diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c index b01dde35a69e..7204ad3aff65 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ void br_fdb_delete_by_port(struct net_bridge *br, spin_unlock_bh(&br->hash_lock); } -/* No locking or refcounting, assumes caller has no preempt (rcu_read_lock) */ +/* No locking or refcounting, assumes caller has rcu_read_lock */ struct net_bridge_fdb_entry *__br_fdb_get(struct net_bridge *br, const unsigned char *addr) { -- cgit v1.2.3