Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:02:59AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Possibly fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449315
and/or http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10875
One question and one nit below.
@@ -570,8 +569,8 @@ static void nf_nat_move_storage(void *new, void *old)
return;
spin_lock_bh(&nf_nat_lock);
- hlist_replace_rcu(&old_nat->bysource, &new_nat->bysource);
new_nat->ct = ct;
+ hlist_replace_rcu(&old_nat->bysource, &new_nat->bysource);
The intent is to ensure that new_nat->ct is initialized before any
readers can find new_nat, right? If so, OK.
Correct. Its relying on the smb_wmb() in hlist_replace_rcu(),
but that seems OK.
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.c
index bcc19fa..8a3f8b3 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.c
@@ -59,12 +59,19 @@ nf_ct_ext_create(struct nf_ct_ext **ext, enum nf_ct_ext_id id, gfp_t gfp)
if (!*ext)
return NULL;
+ INIT_RCU_HEAD(&(*ext)->rcu);
Nit: the above is unnecessary.
I think its good style to use explicit initializers without
making assumptions about what exactly they do.
Thanks for the review.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
