[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpWxCShCgiBrraJ3h9qzgVU82quq0E5vmFMSEcgEwSctJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 13:42:05 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 3/8] net_sched: mirred: remove action when the
target device is gone
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/13 13:36, Cong Wang wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/15/13 23:15, Cong Wang wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When the target device is removed, the mirred action is
>>>> still there but with the dev pointer setting to NULL.
>>>> This makes the output from 'tc filter' ugly. There is no
>>>> reason to keep it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry - this one i have problems with.
>>> actions may be referenced from multiple filters,
>>> you cant just delete it (that would leave other users
>>> pointing to it dangling). Destroying would eventually
>>> delete it when the refcount goes to 0.
>>
>>
>> How? tcf_action_init() always allocates a new action,
>> it doesn't even look for an existing one.
>>
>
>
> tc action blah index 123
> tc action filter goo action blah index 123
> tc action filter gah action blah index 123
>
> Very useful for example for multiple flows to
> share the same policer.
>
Ah, I see. I will create a test case for this
and rework on the mirred patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists