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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-10 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ 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
[not found] <20090129172030.GA2189@ioremap.net>
2009-02-09 16:09 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-13 12:49 ` 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).