[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADvbK_df=Z1re2wPUF9JCXggBzRqF=Tgt86PXV0KqBcx3VeVNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:00:35 +0800
From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tgraf@...g.ch,
fengguang.wu@...el.com, wfg@...ux.intel.com, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: rhashtable: Prevent spurious EBUSY errors on insertion
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 04:46:00PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>>
>> sorry for late test, but unfortunately, my case with rhashtalbe still
>> return EBUSY.
>> I added some debug code in rhashtable_insert_rehash(), and found:
>> *future_tbl is null*
>>
>> fail:
>> /* Do not fail the insert if someone else did a rehash. */
>> if (likely(rcu_dereference_raw(tbl->future_tbl))) {
>> printk("future_tbl is there\n");
>> return 0;
>> } else {
>> printk("future_tbl is null\n");
>> }
>>
>> any idea why ?
>
> That's presumably because you got a genuine double rehash.
>
> Until you post your code we can't really help you.
>
i wish i could , but my codes is a big patch for sctp, and this issue
happens in a special stress test based on this patch.
im trying to think how i can show you. :)
--
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