On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 8:48 AM Cong Wang <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 6:14 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]>
> >
> > To avoid some issues, for example RCU usage warning, we should
> > flush the flows under ovs_lock. This patch refactors
> > table_instance_destroy and introduces table_instance_flow_flush
> > which can be invoked by __dp_destroy or ovs_flow_tbl_flush.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]>
>
> Please add a Fixes tag here, I think it is probably your memory leak fix
> which introduced this issue. And a Reported-by, to give credits to bug
> reporters.
>
> Plus one minor issue below:
>
> > -static void table_instance_destroy(struct flow_table *table,
> > -                                  struct table_instance *ti,
> > -                                  struct table_instance *ufid_ti,
> > -                                  bool deferred)
> > +/* Must be called with OVS mutex held. */
> > +void table_instance_flow_flush(struct flow_table *table,
> > +                              struct table_instance *ti,
> > +                              struct table_instance *ufid_ti)
> >  {
> >         int i;
> >
> > -       if (!ti)
> > -               return;
> > -
> > -       BUG_ON(!ufid_ti);
> >         if (ti->keep_flows)
> > -               goto skip_flows;
> > +               return;
> >
> >         for (i = 0; i < ti->n_buckets; i++) {
> > -               struct sw_flow *flow;
> >                 struct hlist_head *head = &ti->buckets[i];
> >                 struct hlist_node *n;
> > +               struct sw_flow *flow;
>
> This is at most a coding style change, please do not mix
> coding style changes in bug fixes. You can always push coding
> style changes separately when net-next is open.

Thanks, v2 will be sent

>
> Thanks.
>
-- 
Best regards, Tonghao
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to