[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150901124648.GA27550@orbit.nwl.cc>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:46:48 +0200
From: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: tgraf@...g.ch, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
wfg@...ux.intel.com, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] rhashtable-test: retry insert operations in threads
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 07:43:00PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:00:12PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote:
> >
> > The variable would be used to track if the worker has failed to allocate
> > memory in background.
> >
> > Since the failing insertion will be retried, subsequent inserts are not
> > necessary unrelated.
>
> If an insertion fails it is never retried. The only thing that is
> retried is the expansion of the table. So I have no idea what
> you are talking about.
This is not an inherent behaviour of the implementation but general
agreement. The insertion may fail non-permanently (returning -EBUSY),
users are expected to handle this by retrying the operation.
Cheers, Phil
--
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