[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <885896af0902262354v47ddf79ch3d62edaeb1e940bd@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Feb 2009 08:54:41 +0100
From:	Giacomo <delleceste@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: correct locking in softirq
Good morning
Harald Welte's "The journey of a packet through the Linux 2.6.10
network stack" article says that packet travelling inside
linux kernel 2.6 (the receive / input part) runs in softirq context.
Hooking with netfilter's hooks in a kernel module, i need to read for
each packet received a list of rules.
Since in input and prerouting hooks the context is softirq (perhaps
also in forward?), I need some read lock
feature.
I currently use RCU lists and, while reading lists I use
READ
read_lock_bh()
together with list_for_each_rcu()
When changing, or flushing, rules, I use
WRITE
spin_lock() + list_add_tail_rcu() (adding)
or spin_lock() + list_for_each_entry() (for listing and then freeing
with list_del_rcu() and call_rcu() )
The question is:
- is the read part above correct? - do I really need _bh()? or should
I use simply read_lock() ?
Thanks in advance
Giacomo
-- 
Giacomo S.
http://www.giacomos.it
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* Aprile 2008: iqfire-wall, un progetto
  open source che implementa un
  filtro di pacchetti di rete per Linux,
  e` disponibile per il download qui:
  http://sourceforge.net/projects/ipfire-wall
* Informazioni e pagina web ufficiale:
  http://www.giacomos.it/iqfire/index.html
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 . ''  `.
:   :'    :
 `.  ` '
    `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
        http://www.debian.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
