From c6cdcf6d82bc8f53e64ad59464e0114fe48e28bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "nikolay@redhat.com" Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:12:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] bonding: fix locking in enslave failure path In commit 3c5913b53fefc9d9e15a2d0f93042766658d9f3f ("bonding: primary_slave & curr_active_slave are not cleaned on enslave failure") I didn't account for the use of curr_active_slave without curr_slave_lock and since there are such users, we should hold bond->lock for writing while setting it to NULL (in the NULL case we don't need the curr_slave_lock). Keeping the bond lock as to avoid the extra release/acquire cycle. Signed-off-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c index dbbea0eec134..7db40de1b41f 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c @@ -1915,14 +1915,16 @@ int bond_enslave(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev) bond_detach_slave(bond, new_slave); if (bond->primary_slave == new_slave) bond->primary_slave = NULL; - write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock); if (bond->curr_active_slave == new_slave) { + bond_change_active_slave(bond, NULL); + write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock); read_lock(&bond->lock); write_lock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock); - bond_change_active_slave(bond, NULL); bond_select_active_slave(bond); write_unlock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock); read_unlock(&bond->lock); + } else { + write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock); } slave_disable_netpoll(new_slave);