Re: RTNL assert

From: Andrew Morton (andrewm@uow.edu.au)
Date: Sat Oct 28 2000 - 12:18:43 EDT

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:"

Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: question on SMP and read()/write()"
In reply to: Stephen E. Clark: "Re: RTNL assert"
Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: RTNL assert"
Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: RTNL assert"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

"Stephen E. Clark" wrote:
>
> I also get the same error if I try to configure in normal IPV4
> tunneling. I guess it needs the same kind of patch.

Yep.

--- linux-2.4.0-test10-pre5/net/ipv4/ipip.c Sat Sep 9 16:19:30 2000
+++ linux-akpm/net/ipv4/ipip.c Sun Oct 29 03:17:38 2000
@@ -894,7 +894,9 @@
#ifdef MODULE
         register_netdev(&ipip_fb_tunnel_dev);
#else
+ rtnl_lock();
         register_netdevice(&ipip_fb_tunnel_dev);
+ rtnl_unlock();
#endif

         inet_add_protocol(&ipip_protocol);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: question on SMP and read()/write()"
In reply to: Stephen E. Clark: "Re: RTNL assert"
Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: RTNL assert"
Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: RTNL assert"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 28 2000 - 12:22:09 EDT