From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug  5 20:23:05 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C0C8301;
 Mon,  5 Aug 2013 20:23:05 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from rizzo.unipi@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-la0-x234.google.com (mail-la0-x234.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::234])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 313AF2630;
 Mon,  5 Aug 2013 20:23:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id fq13so2423046lab.39
 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 13:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
 :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=HYYcpMGp/JYLBrFL02NsZk+b146MTXEg1cQPplrFqPI=;
 b=tooPMRzea4HMOktJekdye0HM9KRKrxFRIN968Dtk5xkvdnjAZHxnp+GmjU7ZBYGyPr
 BLWzD/hcFZdnPXgHFUSTDK39MOfu6ULZwerI6aJQt41WEhM/Sw1LWJx0Bck74Z1+CM3y
 nhQ3A4j6BYI8VQg2UA0Cc+XIgV6E2/3gR6EAdWBtKijVvPByvNUngj7r2RsoynI7DBZ6
 ERfDBvjvoLMkDBMFdGODG1UaUQnltSkNUsfwbtjvk+8JnTLfg2vRvkpvlufAyIy5Njh0
 SgQULvXK1/8olwd1NDxSAUd0GT27FOfFTrn9WnI0KVk1go2vrCYBYkb/OU68gjanH4oU
 pBjg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.5.199 with SMTP id u7mr9634813lbu.67.1375734182140; Mon,
 05 Aug 2013 13:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: rizzo.unipi@gmail.com
Received: by 10.114.200.165 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFOYbck9QU2_HO-XQkyNyQ+49w0892SE9FbdE3VwNyrDhC3mZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20130805082307.GA35162@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
 <2034715395.855.1375714772487.JavaMail.root@daemoninthecloset.org>
 <CAJ-VmokT6YKPR7CXsoCavEmWv3W8urZu4eBVgKWaj9iMaVJFZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hQ2+huoCCweq7fjoYmH3nyhmhb5DzukEdPSMtaJEWa8Ft0JQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <51FFDD1E.1000206@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAJ-Vmo=Q9AqdBJ0+4AiX4+WreYuZx6VGGYw=MZ4XhMB1P2yMww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hQ2+gZTGmrBKTOAeFnNma4DQXbAy_y8NZrovpWqm_5BJTWhQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFOYbckJaZYQj2D4k41Nmjm9urue9_CDcdQ3yhRddWx0SzXE6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hQ2+hAcyi=uFcOLV1YNMfDAmdhJoTtqtgpb=R_-RKSmWX9FQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFOYbck9QU2_HO-XQkyNyQ+49w0892SE9FbdE3VwNyrDhC3mZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 22:23:02 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: R1Vl7ShBkSaL0gyIsijJhuAdlC0
Message-ID: <CA+hQ2+jLWZK-OOvy8Aw-bwZu5-GgGhGOEHsZ51CJxCzhqDw8WQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [net] protecting interfaces from races between control and data ?
From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>
To: Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
 FreeBSD current mailing list <current@freebsd.org>,
 Bryan Venteicher <bryanv@daemoninthecloset.org>,
 Navdeep Parhar <np@freebsd.org>, net@freebsd.org,
 Giuseppe Lettieri <g.lettieri@iet.unipi.it>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 20:23:05 -0000

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> wrote:

> What do you think about this change?
>
>
looks good to me. but there is no need to rush, especially
it will be nice if all interested parties agree on an approach
and possibly even naming.

I do not have any specific test case but the problem came up
when an interface is in netmap mode and dispatches to the
in-kernel VALE switch, and userland tries to move the interface
back to regular mode.

cheers
luigi