Yes, wanted to show logical flow in this iteration. 

Thanks
Paul




On Wednesday, January 21st, 2026 at 1:42 PM, Victor Nogueira [off-list ref] wrote:

On 21/01/2026 10:20, Paul Moses wrote:

quoted

Make gact->param RCU-protected and reclaim old params via call_rcu(). This
follows the pattern used by other actions: act_pedit swaps params with
rcu_replace_pointer() and defers free via call_rcu() (commit 52cf89f78c01bf),
act_connmark uses rcu_replace_pointer() under tcf_lock (commit 288864effe3388),
and act_tunnel_key does the same under lockdep (commit 445d3749315f34).

Dump readers in act_ct and act_pedit already use rcu_read_lock() +
rcu_dereference() (commits 554e66bad84ce4 and 9d096746572616), so act_gate
must keep old params alive past updates as well.
[...]

I think you could've transformed patches 2, 3, 4 into a single patch.
Since all of them are RCU-related changes and they sometimes overwrite
each other.