On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 8:52 AM, John Fastabend <john.fastab...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 16-09-08 10:26 PM, Cong Wang wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 08:47 -0700, John Fastabend wrote: >>> >>>> Works for me. FWIW I find this plenty straightforward and don't really >>>> see the need to make the hash table itself rcu friendly. >>>> >>>> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastab...@intel.com> >>>> >>> >>> Yes, it seems this hash table is used in control path, with RTNL held >>> anyway. >> >> Seriously? You never read hashtable in fast path?? I think you need >> to wake up. >> > > But the actions use refcnt'ing and should never be decremented to zero > as long as they can still be referenced by an active filter. If each > action handles its parameters like mirred/gact then I don't see why its > necessary.
This is correct, by "read" I meant "dereference", the tc actions are now permanently stored in hashtable directly, so "reading" a tc action is reading from hashtable. Sorry if this wasn't clear.
