All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@diku.dk>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Netfilter Development Mailinglist
	<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>,
	hawk@comx.dk
Subject: Re: Passive OS fingerprint xtables match.
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 00:54:44 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090310215443.GA9660@ioremap.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0903102147480.21593@ask.diku.dk>

Hi.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:01:30PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer (hawk@diku.dk) wrote:
> >+static void __exit ipt_osf_fini(void)
> >+{
> >+	struct ipt_osf_finger *f;
> >+	int i;
> >+
> >+	cn_del_callback(&cn_osf_id);
> >+	xt_unregister_match(&ipt_osf_match);
> >+
> >+	rcu_read_lock();
> >+	for (i=0; i<ARRAY_SIZE(ipt_osf_fingers); ++i) {
> >+		struct ipt_osf_finger_storage *st = &ipt_osf_fingers[i];
> >+
> >+		list_for_each_entry_rcu(f, &st->finger_list, finger_entry) {
> 
> spin_lock(&st->finger_lock); //???
> >+			list_del_rcu(&f->finger_entry);
> spin_unlock(&st->finger_lock);
> 
> >+			call_rcu(&f->rcu_head, ipt_osf_finger_free_rcu);
> >+		}
> >+	}
> >+	rcu_read_unlock();
> 
> Should the list_del_rcu() not be protected by a spinlock?

Not required at this place - all users are already unregistered and
no code can access this list except module exit path.

> >+	rcu_barrier();
> 
> In some of my code I call synchronize_net(), is it enough to call 
> rcu_barrier()?

It is enough here, rcu_barrier() will wait until all scheduled
call_rcu() are completed, that's what we need. But in some cases we
should only wait for the whole grace period to elapse, then one has to use
synchronize_rcu() and friends. rcu_barrier() will wait for the callbacks
to be executed, while they are executed after grace period has elapsed,
so it implicitly includes synchronize_rcu(), but effectively they are
the same: both functions register rcu callback and wait for the
completion, rcu_barrier() is a bit more enhanced, since it has several
types.

> What is the difference between:
> 
>  synchronize_rcu()
>  synchronize_net()

Those are essentially the same - synchronize_net() has additional
might_sleep()  call. Both will wait until grace period elapced - i.e.
all currently RCU protected sections completed.

>  rcu_barrier()

It will wait until all scheduled rcu callbacks are executed.

So from the description they look different, but implementation
suggestes that effectively they are the same, except that there are a
bit different invocation types for the barrier.

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov

  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-10 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-10 15:13 Passive OS fingerprint xtables match Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-10 16:01 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-10 16:07 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-03-11 21:43   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-10 16:12 ` Passive OS fingerprint xtables match (iptables) Jan Engelhardt
2009-03-10 21:01 ` Passive OS fingerprint xtables match Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-03-10 21:54   ` Evgeniy Polyakov [this message]
2009-03-16 14:40   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-11  9:54 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2009-03-11 10:00   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-16 14:42     ` Patrick McHardy
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-06-07 15:17 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-06-08 15:06 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-08 17:25   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-06-04 16:22 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-06-05 11:54 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-05 13:10   ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-05 13:30     ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-05 13:44       ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-07 15:12   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-26 14:14 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-26 14:18 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-26 14:59   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-26 15:08     ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-26 15:41       ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-26 15:47         ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-30  6:20           ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-05-01 20:15             ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-12 17:12 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-12 17:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-02-12 17:51   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-12 20:41     ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-02-18 14:55   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-12 18:22 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-12 18:57   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-12 20:12     ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-13 13:03       ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-13 13:51         ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-13 14:22           ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-13 14:41             ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-15 17:32               ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-18 15:02         ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 15:07           ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-18 15:30             ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-19 11:56               ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-02-18 15:00       ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 15:28         ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-18 15:14 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-29 17:20 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-01-30  1:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-02-09 16:09 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-13 12:49   ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-01-27 22:55 Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-01-29  3:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-29 15:03   ` Evgeniy Polyakov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090310215443.GA9660@ioremap.net \
    --to=zbr@ioremap.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hawk@comx.dk \
    --cc=hawk@diku.dk \
    --cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.