On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Roman Mashak <m...@mojatatu.com> wrote:
> Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> writes:
>> @@ -124,8 +130,10 @@ static int cls_cgroup_change(struct net *net, struct
>> sk_buff *in_skb,
>> goto errout;
>>
>> rcu_assign_pointer(tp->root, new);
>> - if (head)
>> + if (head) {
>> + tcf_exts_get_net(&head->exts);
>> call_rcu(&head->rcu, cls_cgroup_destroy_rcu);
>
> In this case why do you not need to care about success/failure of
> tcf_exts_get_net() ?
The answer is right in the changelog you omitted... Quoted below:
"Note, on ->destroy() path we have to respect the return value
of tcf_exts_get_net(), on other paths it should always return
true, so we don't need to care."
