On Thu 08 Apr 2021 at 02:50, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 8:36 AM Vlad Buslov <vla...@nvidia.com> wrote: >> >> Action init code increments reference counter when it changes an action. >> This is the desired behavior for cls API which needs to obtain action >> reference for every classifier that points to action. However, act API just >> needs to change the action and releases the reference before returning. >> This sequence breaks when the requested action doesn't exist, which causes >> act API init code to create new action with specified index, but action is >> still released before returning and is deleted (unless it was referenced >> concurrently by cls API). >> >> Reproduction: >> >> $ sudo tc actions ls action gact >> $ sudo tc actions change action gact drop index 1 >> $ sudo tc actions ls action gact >> > > I didn't know 'change' could actually create an action when > it does not exist. So it sets NLM_F_REPLACE, how could it > replace a non-existing one? Is this the right behavior or is it too > late to change even if it is not?
Origins of setting ovr based on NLM_F_REPLACE are lost since this code goes back to Linus' Linux-2.6.12-rc2 commit. Jamal, do you know if this is the expected behavior or just something unintended? > >> Extend tcf_action_init() to accept 'init_res' array and initialize it with >> action->ops->init() result. In tcf_action_add() remove pointers to created >> actions from actions array before passing it to tcf_action_put_many(). > > In my last comments, I actually meant whether we can avoid this > 'init_res[]' array. Since here you want to check whether an action > returned by tcf_action_init_1() is a new one or an existing one, how > about checking its refcnt? Something like: > > act = tcf_action_init_1(...); > if (IS_ERR(act)) { > err = PTR_ERR(act); > goto err; > } > if (refcount_read(&act->tcfa_refcnt) == 1) { > // we know this is a newly allocated one > } > > Thanks. Hmm, I don't think this would work in general case. Consider following cases: 1. Action existed during init as filter action(refcnt=1), init overwrote it setting refcnt=2, by the time we got to checking tcfa_refcnt filter has been deleted (refcnt=1) so code will incorrectly assume that it has created the action. 2. We need this check in tcf_action_add() to release the refcnt in case of overwriting existing actions, but by that time actions are already accessible though idr, so even in case when new action has been created (refcnt=1) it could already been referenced by concurrently created filter (refcnt=2). Regards, Vlad