On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 12:50 AM Vlad Buslov <vla...@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu 08 Apr 2021 at 02:50, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In my last comments, I actually meant whether we can avoid this
> > 'init_res[]' array. Since here you want to check whether an action
> > returned by tcf_action_init_1() is a new one or an existing one, how
> > about checking its refcnt? Something like:
> >
> > act = tcf_action_init_1(...);
> > if (IS_ERR(act)) {
> > err = PTR_ERR(act);
> > goto err;
> > }
> > if (refcount_read(&act->tcfa_refcnt) == 1) {
> > // we know this is a newly allocated one
> > }
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> Hmm, I don't think this would work in general case. Consider following
> cases:
>
> 1. Action existed during init as filter action(refcnt=1), init overwrote
> it setting refcnt=2, by the time we got to checking tcfa_refcnt filter
> has been deleted (refcnt=1) so code will incorrectly assume that it has
> created the action.
>
> 2. We need this check in tcf_action_add() to release the refcnt in case
> of overwriting existing actions, but by that time actions are already
> accessible though idr, so even in case when new action has been created
> (refcnt=1) it could already been referenced by concurrently created
> filter (refcnt=2).
Hmm, I nearly forgot RTNL is lifted for some cases along TC filter
and action control paths... It seems we have no better way to work
around this.
Thanks.
