Re: [PATCH 2/3] netfilter: fix list_entry_rcu usage.

[Patrick Marlier]

On 03/25/2015 03:36 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:31:44AM +0100, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> > >Signed-off-by: Patrick Marlier<patrick.marlier@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >---
> > >  net/netfilter/core.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/net/netfilter/core.c b/net/netfilter/core.c
> > >index fea9ef5..05bd311 100644
> > >--- a/net/netfilter/core.c
> > >+++ b/net/netfilter/core.c
> > >@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ int nf_hook_slow(u_int8_t pf, unsigned int hook,
> > >struct sk_buff *skb,
> > >     /* We may already have this, but read-locks nest anyway */
> > >     rcu_read_lock();
> > >
> > >-   elem = list_entry_rcu(&nf_hooks[pf][hook], struct nf_hook_ops, list);
> > >+   elem = list_entry_rcu(nf_hooks[pf][hook].next, struct nf_hook_ops, list);
> And this departs from the list_entry() API.  Is this really a good idea?

No opinion on that but AFAIK there are only 2 spots in the whole kernel 
source where the ".next" is not used with list_entry_rcu.
--
Patrick Marlier
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/