On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Eric Dumazet [off-list ref] wrote:
On Sun, 2017-03-05 at 21:38 -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
quoted
Do you really want to disable BH again here?
dccp_check_req() should be always called on RX path where BH
is already disabled and BH can't be disabled twice?
What makes you think BH can't be disabled twice ?
Look, I prefer being cautious here, no need to get another DCCP bug
report later.
Hmm, I thought BH should have a local_bh_save() to save its context
but looking into its implementation it uses the preempt count to determine
if BH is disabled or not, unlikely hardirq's. Sorry for the noise.