Dan Smith wrote:
> OL> I'm confused: in checkpoint_ns() inside the for_each_netdev() loop
> OL> you first test for dev->netdev_ops->ndo_checkpoint and then call
> OL> checkpoint_obj(... CKPT_OBJ_NETDEV) - which in turn will call
> OL> checkpoint_netdev(), which will again test for
> dev-> netdev_ops->ndo_checkpoint ... am I reading it wrongly ?
>
> In the case of veth, yes. It goes something like this:
>
> checkpoint_netns() {
> foreach netdev in netns {
> checkpoint_netdev {
> if netdev is veth {
> checkpoint_peer(); // Will call checkpoint_netdev again
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> It shouldn't happen, but it seems like since we could potentially add
> another checkpoint_obj(mydev) somewhere other than in
> checkpoint_netdev(), it is reasonable to check that there is actually
> something to call before we call it.
>
> Would you prefer a BUG()?
Ok.. so this is solved over IRC - the test was redundant :)
>
> OL> How about this - to me it feels simpler:
>
> OL> dev = rtnl_newlink(veth_new_link_msg, &veth, this_name);
> OL> if (IS_ERR(dev))
> OL> return dev;
>
> OL> peer = dev_get_by_name(current->nsproxy->net_ns, peer_name);
> OL> if (!peer) {
> OL> ret = -EINVAL;
> OL> goto err_dev;
> OL> }
> OL> ret = ckpt_obj_insert(ctx, peer, h->veth.peer_ref,
> OL> CKPT_OBJ_NETDEV);
> OL> if (ret < 0)
> OL> goto err_peer;
>
> OL> dev_put(peer);
>
> OL> dq.dev = dev;
> OL> dq.peer = peer;
> OL> ret = deferqueue_add(ctx->deferqueue, &dq, sizeof(dq),
> OL> netdev_noop, netdev_cleanup);
> OL> if (ret)
> OL> goto err_peer;
>
> If you fail here you need to unregister_netdev() because the dev_put()
> that the objhash will not cause it to happen. Unless we add something
> to allow you to remove your object from the hash, you can't prevent
> that final put, so you have to have it in the deferqueue for
> later. You can't check the refcount in the objhash function because it
> will differ depending on the number of addresses and protocols the
> device has, and those don't get released until unregister_netdev()
> which will block if you call it before you've released all of your
> references. If the objhash put function could examine ctx->errno,
> then it could drop its reference and then call unregister_netdev(),
> but that would involve changing all the drop functions. What am I
> missing?
>
Oh .. I see - I missed that point that a ref is taken once it's
inserted to the objhash, so insert must be preceeded by the call
to deferqueue. Thanks for the explanation.
It still makes sense to have a single call to deferqueue that
relates to both the veth and the peer, instead of two separate
calls, no ?
Oren.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
