On 11/19/25 12:35 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 12:26:23AM -0600, Dan Jurgens wrote:
>> On 11/18/25 3:55 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 08:38:58AM -0600, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
>>>> Classifiers can be used by more than one rule. If there is an existing
>>>> classifier, use it instead of creating a new one.
>>
>>>> +  struct virtnet_classifier *tmp;
>>>> +  unsigned long i;
>>>>    int err;
>>>>  
>>>> -  err = xa_alloc(&ff->classifiers, &c->id, c,
>>>> +  xa_for_each(&ff->classifiers, i, tmp) {
>>>> +          if ((*c)->size == tmp->size &&
>>>> +              !memcmp(&tmp->classifier, &(*c)->classifier, tmp->size)) {
>>>
>>> note that classifier has padding bytes.
>>> comparing these with memcmp is not safe, is it?
>>
>> The reserved bytes are set to 0, this is fine.
> 
> I mean the compiler padding.  set to 0 where?

There's no compiler padding in virtio_net_ff_selector. There are
reserved fields between the count and selector array.

> 
>>>
>>>
>>>> +                  refcount_inc(&tmp->refcount);
>>>> +                  kfree(*c);
>>>> +                  *c = tmp;
>>>> +                  goto out;
>>>> +          }
>>>> +  }
>>>> +
>>>> +  err = xa_alloc(&ff->classifiers, &(*c)->id, *c,
>>>>                   XA_LIMIT(0, le32_to_cpu(ff->ff_caps->classifiers_limit) 
>>>> - 1),
>>>>                   GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>    if (err)
>>>
>>> what kind of locking prevents two threads racing in this code?
>>
>> The ethtool calls happen under rtnl_lock.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> @@ -6932,29 +6945,30 @@ static int setup_classifier(struct virtnet_ff *ff, 
>>>> struct virtnet_classifier *c)
>>>>                  (*c)->size);
>>>>    if (err)
>>>>            goto err_xarray;
>>>>  
>>>> +  refcount_set(&(*c)->refcount, 1);
>>>
>>>
>>> so you insert uninitialized refcount? can't another thread find it
>>> meanwhile?
>>
>> Again, rtnl_lock.
>>
>>
>>>>  
>>>>    err = insert_rule(ff, eth_rule, c->id, key, key_size);
>>>>    if (err) {
>>>>            /* destroy_classifier will free the classifier */
>>>
>>> will free is no longer correct, is it?
>>
>> Clarified the comment.
>>
>>>
>>>> -          destroy_classifier(ff, c->id);
>>>> +          try_destroy_classifier(ff, c->id);
>>>>            goto err_key;
>>>>    }
>>>>  
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.50.1
>>>
> 


Reply via email to