Subject: Re: [PATCH] Virtual ethernet device (tunnel)

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 14:59:05 +0200

jamal wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-05 at 14:34 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
> 
>>Thats a lot better than using sysfs, but I think it would be
>>preferrable to use rtnetlink instead of genetlink for network
>>configuration.
> 
> 
> or you can just hold rtnl while using genl.
> I do agree it would be easier to just use rtnetlink ...

The rtnl needs to be held in either case, but using a different
netlink family introduces races in message processing. For example
a simple:

ip link add dev veth0
ip route add 10.0.0.0/8 dev veth0

might fail because we have two different input queues and the routing
message might get processed before the link message.