Re: [PATCH] wireless extensions: play with netns

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 13:46 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Johannes Berg [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

This makes wireless extensions netns aware.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <redacted>
---
Is this ok, or is this racy? I guess what I'm asking is -- will
for_each_net() stop iterating over a netns that is going away before the
pernet exit op is called? If yes, this should be fine.

for_each_net requires the rtnl_lock or the net_mutex to be safe.
You aren't taking either so your code is racy.

So it looks like I can also use rcu_read_lock(), but there's no
for_each_net_rcu(), should there be?

johannes