[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1367000815.8964.243.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:26:55 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>, dhaval.giani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Use cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper when
dumping connections
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:48 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I am not opposing cond_resched_rcu_lock() because it
> will be difficult to validate. For one thing, until there are a lot of
> them, manual inspection is quite possible. So feel free to apply my
> Acked-by to the patch.
One question : If some thread(s) is(are) calling rcu_barrier() and
waiting we exit from rcu_read_lock() section, is need_resched() enough
for allowing to break the section ?
If not, maybe we should not test need_resched() at all.
rcu_read_unlock();
cond_resched();
rcu_read_lock();
--
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