From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:23:55 +1000

quoted text
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 08:17:13AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >
> > As I've written before I'm mainly concerned with things like
> > tcf_destroy_chain(), especially wrt. cls_u32, but I can be wrong with
> > this. So, if you don't have such concerns, let's forget it for now,
> > and after I look at this more maybe we'll get back to this discussion.
> 
> Well I can't vouch for every single qdisc in the tree.  However,
> what I can say is that as long as they respect the rules I outlined
> earlier with regards to holding the root qdisc lock when deleting
> or using children, then they'll work as expected.
> 
> You're definitely welcome to audit the qdiscs to make sure that
> they are obeying the rules.

Jarek may have a point about the u32 classifier.  So we
should think about it.

The hash tables and tp_u_common objects are shared, and
it does non-atomic refcounting during destruction, see
u32_destroy().

However, this all might be OK because all of this management
is performed only under the RTNL semaphore.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html