From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] mark root hnode explicitly
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 04:04:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180907030438.GX19965@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpUDpKB2y0Yy5YJjj7MALGsDLJKpdXYZkydmCo1N_uo=FA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 07:57:25PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> > - if (root_ht == ht) {
> > + if (ht->is_root) {
>
>
> What's wrong with comparing pointers with root ht?
The fact that there may be more than one tcf_proto sharing tp->data.
> > NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Not allowed to delete root node");
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> > @@ -795,6 +797,10 @@ static int u32_set_parms(struct net *net, struct tcf_proto *tp,
> > NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Link hash table not found");
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> > + if (ht_down->is_root) {
>
> root ht is saved in tp->root, so you can compare ht_down with it too,
> if you want.
>
> If this check is all what you need, you don't need an extra flag.
Again, *which* tp? We can trivially check that we are not linking to/deleting
our own root, sure. But there's nothing to stop doing the same via another
tcf_proto...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-07 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-05 19:01 [PATCHES] cls_u32 cleanups and fixes Al Viro
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 1/7] fix hnode refcounting Al Viro
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 2/7] mark root hnode explicitly Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:28 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-06 10:34 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-06 10:42 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-06 10:59 ` Al Viro
2018-09-06 11:04 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-07 2:57 ` Cong Wang
2018-09-07 3:04 ` Al Viro [this message]
2018-09-07 3:23 ` Cong Wang
2018-09-07 3:49 ` Al Viro
2018-09-07 4:14 ` Cong Wang
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 3/7] make sure that divisor is a power of 2 Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:28 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 4/7] get rid of unused argument of u32_destroy_key() Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:34 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 5/7] get rid of tc_u_knode ->tp Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:35 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 6/7] get rid of tc_u_common ->rcu Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:36 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-07 4:18 ` Cong Wang
2018-09-07 4:28 ` Al Viro
2018-09-05 19:04 ` [PATCH 7/7] clean tc_u_common hashtable Al Viro
2018-09-06 10:36 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-06 10:21 ` [PATCH 1/7] fix hnode refcounting Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-07 2:35 ` Al Viro
2018-09-07 12:13 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-07 12:33 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-08 15:03 ` Al Viro
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=20180907030438.GX19965@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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.