From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net, cls: allow for deleting all filters for given parent Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:32:48 +0200 Message-ID: <5755DDF0.4060503@iogearbox.net> References: <5755CE3A.7050002@iogearbox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , Alexei Starovoitov , john fastabend , Jamal Hadi Salim , Linux Kernel Network Developers To: Cong Wang Return-path: Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:50712 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751058AbcFFUcx (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2016 16:32:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/06/2016 09:52 PM, Cong Wang wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 06/06/2016 07:12 PM, Cong Wang wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Daniel Borkmann >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> + if (n->nlmsg_type == RTM_DELTFILTER && prio == 0) { >>>> + tcf_destroy_chain(chain); >>>> + err = 0; >>>> + goto errout; >>>> + } >>> >>> We need to notify users we removed which filters, right? >> >> As far as I know, most such use cases that listen on this are bypasses >> that mirror kernel configs from user space ... but well, sure, I can add >> a notification if people care. Would do this as a separate patch. > > This is fundamental for libnl to update caches. I see, makes sense then. Thanks! > I don't understand why it should be separated, since notification is > not a feature, we already have notifications in other paths. > >> Looking into this, I would probably make this a single notification that >> denotes this 'wild-card' removal for that parent instead of calling >> tfilter_notify() for each filter separately (which allocs skb, dumps it, >> etc), qdisc del doesn't loop through it either, so probably fine this way. > > Makes sense. > > Thanks. >