Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 4/4] batman-adv: debugfs: Add netns support

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 09:28:07AM +0800, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 06:48:30PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(batadv_debugfs_ns_mutex);
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +static void batadv_debugfs_ns_put(struct net *net)
> > +{
> > +	struct batadv_debugfs_ns_entry *ns_entry;
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(&batadv_debugfs_ns_mutex);
> > +	list_for_each_entry(ns_entry, &batadv_debugfs_ns, link) {
> > +		if (ns_entry->net == net) {
> > +			kref_put(&ns_entry->refcount, batadv_ns_entry_release);
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	mutex_unlock(&batadv_debugfs_ns_mutex);
> > +}
> >  
> 
> Andrew, is there any particular reason why in this case we use a mutex instead
> of a spinlock + RCU ? I imagine it is something related to debugfs..or just to
> make the code simpler as we don't really require a full-blown RCU strategy ?
 
I just wanted it to be KISS. We are on a very slow path, only called
when interfaces are added and removed. Keeping it KISS makes it easier
to review, make sure i have an unlock for every lock, etc. It is also
what is the kref documentation suggests.
 
> >  int batadv_debugfs_add_hardif(struct batadv_hard_iface *hard_iface)
> >  {
> > +	char *name = hard_iface->net_dev->name;
> > +	struct net *net = dev_net(hard_iface->net_dev);
> 
> here we should respect David's inverted Christmas tree rule :)

Yes, i will change this.

> >  	struct batadv_debuginfo **bat_debug;
> > +	struct dentry *debugfs_ns_dir;
> >  	struct dentry *file;
> >  
> >  	if (!batadv_debugfs)
> >  		goto out;
> >  
> > -	hard_iface->debug_dir = debugfs_create_dir(hard_iface->net_dev->name,
> > -						   batadv_debugfs);
> 
> how about:
> 
> 	debugfs_ns_dir = batadv_debugfs;
> 
> > +	if (net != &init_net) {
> > +		debugfs_ns_dir = batadv_debugfs_ns_get(net);
> > +		if (!debugfs_ns_dir)
> > +			goto out;
> 	}
> 
> 	hard_iface->debug_dir = debugfs_create_dir(name, debugfs_ns_dir);
> 
> isn't it nicer? :)

O.K, i will rearrange.

     Andrew