Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Mark more nodes as CTLFLAG_MPSAFE or CTLFLAG_NEEDGIANT (M of N)
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by kaktus on Tue, Feb 11, 9:11 PM.

Details

Reviewers
kib
kp
glebius
Summary

r357614 added CTLFLAG_NEEDGIANT to make it easier to find nodes that are still not MPSAFE (or already are but aren’t properly marked). Use it in preparation for a general review of all nodes.
This is non-functional change that adds annotations to SYSCTL_NODE and SYSCTL_PROC nodes using one of the soon-to-be-required flags.

You’re asked for a review based on src/MAINTAINERS entry.

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Unit Tests Skipped

Event Timeline

kaktus created this revision.Tue, Feb 11, 9:11 PM
kaktus added inline comments.Sun, Feb 16, 11:50 AM
sys/netinet/ip_carp.c
225

MPSAFE

229

Require some locking? Or is the path too short and we don't care?

238

Probably MPSAFE? Use atomic to change the value, but sends the notification via taskqueue(9).

kp added a comment.Mon, Feb 17, 9:27 AM

I'm not sure why we care about CTLFLAG_MPSAFE on nodes with no handler (pf, pfsync), but I have no objections.

sys/netinet/ip_carp.c
229

I think it's just safe. All we do is overwrite one value, which ought to be atomic all by itself.
Even if it's not, the consequences would be limited to a one-off packet with an odd DSCP value.

238

Yeah, that looks safe to me too.