On Tue 07 Aug 2018 at 16:36, Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> wrote:
> Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:54:23AM CEST, vla...@mellanox.com wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>diff --git a/include/net/tc_act/tc_tunnel_key.h
>>b/include/net/tc_act/tc_tunnel_key.h
>>index 46b8c7f1c8d5..e6e475d788c6 100644
>>--- a/include/net/tc_act/tc_tunnel_key.h
>>+++ b/include/net/tc_act/tc_tunnel_key.h
>>@@ -30,26 +30,47 @@ struct tcf_tunnel_key {
>>
>> static inline bool is_tcf_tunnel_set(const struct tc_action *a)
>> {
>>+ bool ret = false;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT
>> struct tcf_tunnel_key *t = to_tunnel_key(a);
>>- struct tcf_tunnel_key_params *params = rtnl_dereference(t->params);
>>+ struct tcf_tunnel_key_params *params;
>>
>>+ rcu_read_lock();
>>+ params = rcu_dereference(t->params);
>> if (a->ops && a->ops->type == TCA_ACT_TUNNEL_KEY)
>>- return params->tcft_action == TCA_TUNNEL_KEY_ACT_SET;
>>+ ret = params->tcft_action == TCA_TUNNEL_KEY_ACT_SET;
>>+ rcu_read_unlock();
>> #endif
>>- return false;
>>+ return ret;
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool is_tcf_tunnel_release(const struct tc_action *a)
>
> Why are these tunnel things in a mirred patch?
Mistake during re-slit. Will move those to tunnel_key patch.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>> static struct net_device *tcf_mirred_get_dev(const struct tc_action *a)
>> {
>> struct tcf_mirred *m = to_mirred(a);
>>+ struct net_device *dev;
>>+
>>+ rcu_read_lock();
>>+ dev = rcu_dereference(m->tcfm_dev);
>>+ if (dev)
>>+ dev_hold(dev);
>>+ rcu_read_unlock();
>>
>>- return rtnl_dereference(m->tcfm_dev);
>>+ return dev;
>> }
>>
>> static int tcf_mirred_delete(struct net *net, u32 index)
>>diff --git a/net/sched/cls_api.c b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>index e8b0bbd0883f..0cce0eadc28b 100644
>>--- a/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>+++ b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>@@ -2167,6 +2167,7 @@ static int tc_exts_setup_cb_egdev_call(struct tcf_exts
>>*exts,
>> if (!dev)
>> continue;
>> ret = tc_setup_cb_egdev_call(dev, type, type_data, err_stop);
>>+ dev_put(dev);
>
> This looks really odd. a->ops->put_dev is needed.
Got it. Will implement put_dev in v2.
>
>
>> if (ret < 0)
>> return ret;
>> ok_count += ret;
>>--
>>2.7.5
>>
Thanks for reviewing my code!
