From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing policy->walk.dead Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:12:48 -0400 Message-ID: <1270044768.26743.58.camel@bigi> References: <1270030626-16687-1-git-send-email-timo.teras@iki.fi> <1270030626-16687-5-git-send-email-timo.teras@iki.fi> <20100331110345.GC12845@gondor.apana.org.au> <1270040773.26743.12.camel@bigi> <20100331131131.GA13793@gondor.apana.org.au> <20100331132622.GA13908@gondor.apana.org.au> <1270042356.26743.30.camel@bigi> <1270042795.26743.31.camel@bigi> <20100331135505.GC14082@gondor.apana.org.au> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Timo Teras , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f220.google.com ([209.85.219.220]:58491 "EHLO mail-ew0-f220.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754937Ab0CaOMz (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:12:55 -0400 Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so43783ewy.1 for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 07:12:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100331135505.GC14082@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 21:55 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > Eliding the notification if SELinux says so is fine, but eliding > it because the table is empty is wrong. > > The flush did not fail just because the table was empty to begin > with. Like i said i didnt touch the behavior except for the selinux case (which sounds very reasonable). I believe there maybe historical legacy reasons for that semantic in pfkey. Can you point to something in the kernel (or anywhere else) that behaves like this on table flushing? Actually if there was an app that depended on netlink flush being exposed on empty table - then i think theres reason for a revert. Other than that i will say again: i respectfully disagree. cheers, jamal