On Fri 15 Feb 2019 at 23:17, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:56 AM Vlad Buslov <vla...@mellanox.com> wrote:
>> +static bool tcf_proto_is_empty(struct tcf_proto *tp)
>> +{
>> + struct tcf_walker walker = { .fn = walker_noop, };
>> +
>> + if (tp->ops->walk) {
>> + tp->ops->walk(tp, &walker);
>> + return !walker.stop;
>> + }
>> + return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static bool tcf_proto_check_delete(struct tcf_proto *tp)
>> +{
>> + spin_lock(&tp->lock);
>> + if (tcf_proto_is_empty(tp))
>> + tp->deleting = true;
>> + spin_unlock(&tp->lock);
>> + return tp->deleting;
>
> If you use this spinlock for walking each tp data structure,
> why it is not needed for adding to/deleting filters from each
> tp?
This lock is intended to be used by unlocked classifiers and I use it in
my following flower patch set extensively. Classifiers that do not set
'unlocked' flag continue to rely on rtnl lock for synchronization.
