From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] ipv4: support sport, dport and ip_proto
 in RTM_GETROUTE
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:30:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJieiUi1p31mrRRP2=X-Z-8fWyfea2JVMgmponMwrUzQF-OyoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1526442908-13183-1-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
 <1526442908-13183-2-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> <20180516.143714.1321600980314123555.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-ua0-f196.google.com ([209.85.217.196]:47082 "EHLO
        mail-ua0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751013AbeEPUa3 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 16 May 2018 16:30:29 -0400
Received: by mail-ua0-f196.google.com with SMTP id e8-v6so1421391uam.13
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 16 May 2018 13:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180516.143714.1321600980314123555.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:37 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
> Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 20:55:06 -0700
>
>> +static int inet_rtm_getroute_reply(struct sk_buff *in_skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
>> +                                __be32 dst, __be32 src, struct flowi4 *fl4,
>> +                                struct rtable *rt, struct fib_result *res)
>> +{
>> +     struct net *net = sock_net(in_skb->sk);
>> +     struct rtmsg *rtm = nlmsg_data(nlh);
>> +     u32 table_id = RT_TABLE_MAIN;
>> +     struct sk_buff *skb;
>> +     int err = 0;
>> +
>> +     skb = nlmsg_new(NLMSG_DEFAULT_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>> +     if (!skb)
>> +             return -ENOMEM;
>
> If the caller can use GFP_KERNEL, so can this allocation.

yes, but we hold rcu read lock before calling the reply function for fib result.
I did consider allocating the skb before the read lock..but then the
refactoring (into a separate netlink reply func) would seem
unnecessary.

I am fine with pre-allocating and undoing the refactoring if that works better.