[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z-vkl4NqfrkoJn-l@krikkit>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 15:05:27 +0200
From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
To: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...nvpn.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, ryazanov.s.a@...il.com,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Xiao Liang <shaw.leon@...il.com>,
willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v24 06/23] ovpn: introduce the ovpn_socket object
2025-03-18, 02:40:41 +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> +void ovpn_socket_release(struct ovpn_peer *peer)
> +{
> + struct ovpn_socket *sock;
> +
> + might_sleep();
> +
> + /* release may be invoked after socket was detached */
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + sock = rcu_dereference_protected(peer->sock, true);
> + if (!sock) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return;
> + }
> + rcu_assign_pointer(peer->sock, NULL);
minor nit: that could be rcu_replace_pointer instead of rcu_deref + rcu_assign_pointer
(and I don't think the rcu_read_lock does much here)
--
Sabrina
Powered by blists - more mailing lists