On Friday, June 06/26/20, 2020 at 21:18:44 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 17:28:41 +0530 Rahul Lakkireddy wrote:
> > + if (refcount_read(&pi->vi_mirror_refcnt) > 1) {
> > + refcount_dec(&pi->vi_mirror_refcnt);
> > + return;
> > + }
>
> FWIW this looks very dodgy. If you know nothing changes the count
> between the read and the dec here, you probably don't need atomic
> refcounts at all..
Currently, all the callers accessing this refcount and its related
data is having the RTNL lock held by the stack. Perhaps this is a
false sense of security, especially if the stack API may change in
the future.
I'll add a proper lock to protect this data in v2 to be on the safer
side.
Thanks,
Rahul
