Tue, May 23, 2017 at 06:42:37PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote:
>tcf_chain_get() always creates a new filter chain if not found
>in existing ones. This is totally unnecessary when we get or
>delete filters, new chain should be only created for new filters
>(or new actions).
>
>Fixes: 5bc1701881e3 ("net: sched: introduce multichain support for filters")
>Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <j...@mojatatu.com>
>Cc: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com>
>---
> include/net/pkt_cls.h | 3 ++-
> net/sched/act_api.c | 2 +-
> net/sched/cls_api.c | 13 +++++++++----
> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/include/net/pkt_cls.h b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>index 2c213a6..f776229 100644
>--- a/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>+++ b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>@@ -18,7 +18,8 @@ int register_tcf_proto_ops(struct tcf_proto_ops *ops);
> int unregister_tcf_proto_ops(struct tcf_proto_ops *ops);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS
>-struct tcf_chain *tcf_chain_get(struct tcf_block *block, u32 chain_index);
>+struct tcf_chain *tcf_chain_get(struct tcf_block *block, u32 chain_index,
>+ bool create);
> void tcf_chain_put(struct tcf_chain *chain);
> int tcf_block_get(struct tcf_block **p_block,
> struct tcf_proto __rcu **p_filter_chain);
>diff --git a/net/sched/act_api.c b/net/sched/act_api.c
>index 0ecf2a8..aed6cf2 100644
>--- a/net/sched/act_api.c
>+++ b/net/sched/act_api.c
>@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static int tcf_action_goto_chain_init(struct tc_action *a,
>struct tcf_proto *tp)
>
> if (!tp)
> return -EINVAL;
>- a->goto_chain = tcf_chain_get(tp->chain->block, chain_index);
>+ a->goto_chain = tcf_chain_get(tp->chain->block, chain_index, true);
> if (!a->goto_chain)
> return -ENOMEM;
> return 0;
>diff --git a/net/sched/cls_api.c b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>index 01a8b8b..23d2236 100644
>--- a/net/sched/cls_api.c
>+++ b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>@@ -220,7 +220,8 @@ static void tcf_chain_destroy(struct tcf_chain *chain)
> kfree(chain);
> }
>
>-struct tcf_chain *tcf_chain_get(struct tcf_block *block, u32 chain_index)
>+struct tcf_chain *tcf_chain_get(struct tcf_block *block, u32 chain_index,
>+ bool create)
> {
> struct tcf_chain *chain;
>
>@@ -230,7 +231,10 @@ struct tcf_chain *tcf_chain_get(struct tcf_block *block,
>u32 chain_index)
> return chain;
> }
> }
>- return tcf_chain_create(block, chain_index);
>+ if (create)
>+ return tcf_chain_create(block, chain_index);
>+ else
>+ return NULL;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(tcf_chain_get);
>
>@@ -509,9 +513,10 @@ static int tc_ctl_tfilter(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
>nlmsghdr *n,
> err = -EINVAL;
> goto errout;
> }
>- chain = tcf_chain_get(block, chain_index);
>+ chain = tcf_chain_get(block, chain_index,
>+ n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER);
First of all, I really hate all these true/false arg dances. Totaly
confusing all the time.
> if (!chain) {
>- err = -ENOMEM;
>+ err = n->nlmsg_type == RTM_NEWTFILTER ? -ENOMEM : -EINVAL;
Confusing. Please do not obfuscate the code for a corner cases. Thanks.
> goto errout;
> }
>
>--
>2.5.5
>
