[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpWMW48oyOkoh7iRZEfwMTVy4t2ORKPU0fsKFmE8d5P0-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 22:39:37 -0700
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 2/2] net/sched: fix filter flushing
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:17 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
> Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:04:58PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com wrote:
>>On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>>>>>You can't claim you really delete it as long as actions can still
>>>>>see it and dump it.
>>>>
>>>> No, user just wants to delete all the filters. That is done. User does
>>>> not care if the actual chain structure is there or not.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, so users see a chain with no filters... Fair enough.
>>
>>But since you remove the chain from the chain_list, it means
>>users could not add new filters to this chain after flushing? And
>
> No, in flush, I don't remove it from the list. That is not in the
> patch. Why would you think so?
Oh, I missed the minus before the first list_del()... I blame my
Web browser font.
Your patch looks good.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists