Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core

From: Daniel Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:34:43 -0700

Thomas Graf wrote:
  > skb->dev is not guaranteed to still point to the "allocating" device
> once the skb is freed again so reserve/unreserve isn't symmetric.
> You'd need skb->alloc_dev or something.

Can you please characterize the conditions under which skb->dev changes
after the alloc?  Are there writings on this subtlety?

Regards,

Daniel