On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 08:31:23AM -0400, jamal wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 14:07 +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 07:56:34AM -0400, jamal wrote: > > > > tp_created is the check > > > n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER && n->nlmsg_flags&NLM_F_CREATE > > > replace will be > > > n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER && n->nlmsg_flags & NLM_F_EXCL > > > > Hmm... Probably I miss something, but I've just seen this prink during > > tc filter replace with: > > > > err = tp->ops->change(); > > if (n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER && (n->nlmsg_flags&NLM_F_CREATE)) > > printk(...); > > That sounds right. > Remeber, you could have NLM_F_EXCL|NLM_F_CREATE to indicate "create this > thing if it doesnt exist; if it exists it is an error" > If it doesnt exist we will enter that (tp == NULL) path > also fh will be 0 ==> So you will never enter the code > path you are refering to. > If it exists (i.e you found it) and you enter the code path you refer > to, then you surely dont want to destroy it if NLM_F_EXCL is set. I mean we don't want to link it again or destroy after ->change() err if we run replace (n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER && (n->nlmsg_flags&NLM_F_CREATE)). > > > > I think they are two separate issues. > > > The fact that we dont destroy an allocated tp on failure is an issue > > > regardless of what cls_group does. In the case of Minoru's issue > > > it is because he is misconfiguring cls_group. > > > > Sure, but we don't want people to get oops in such a case, I guess. > > > > The ops is caused by the code fixed in the patch - did i miss something? IMHO it could be fixed "old way" in cls_group code too. Cheers, Jarek P. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
