Re: Re: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:29:21PM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote:
> 
> >To: "Bernard Metzler" <BMT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >From: "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Date: 07/11/2019 01:53PM
> >Cc: "Leon Romanovsky" <leon@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Stephen Rothwell"
> ><sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Doug Ledford" <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David
> >Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Networking" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> >"Linux Next Mailing List" <linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Linux Kernel
> >Mailing List" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of
> >the net-next tree
> >
> >On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 08:00:49AM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote:
> >
> >> That listen will not sleep. The socket is just marked
> >> listening. 
> >
> >Eh? siw_listen_address() calls siw_cep_alloc() which does:
> >
> >	struct siw_cep *cep = kzalloc(sizeof(*cep), GFP_KERNEL);
> >
> >Which is sleeping. Many other cases too.
> >
> >Jason
> >
> >
> Ah, true! I was after really deep sleeps like user level
> socket accept() calls ;) So you are correct of course.

I've added this patch to the rdma tree to fix the missing locking.

The merge resolution will be simply swapping
for_ifa to in_dev_for_each_ifa_rtnl.

Jason