netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 06/11] net: sched: add 'delete' function to action ops

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 9 Aug 2018 12:38:45 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...lanox.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 06/11] net: sched: add 'delete' function to
 action ops

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 7:24 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> Extend action ops with 'delete' function. Each action type to implements
> its own delete function that doesn't depend on rtnl lock.
>
> Implement delete function that is required to delete actions without
> holding rtnl lock. Use action API function that atomically deletes action
> only if it is still in action idr. This implementation prevents concurrent
> threads from deleting same action twice.

I fail to understand why you introduce ops->delete(), it seems all
you want is getting the tn->idrinfo, but you already have tc_action
before calling ops->delete(), and tc_action has ->idrinfo...

Each type of action does the same too, that is, just calling
tcf_idr_delete_index()...

This changelog sucks again, it claims for skipping rtnl lock,
but you can skip rtnl lock by just calling tcf_idr_delete_index()
directly too, it is not the reason for adding ops->delete().