[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070628130335.GA3284@ff.dom.local>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:03:35 +0200
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"bugme-daemon\@kernel-bugs\.osdl\.org"
<bugme-daemon@...nel-bugs.osdl.org>, ranko@...dernet.net
Subject: Re: [NET]: gen_estimator: fix locking and timer related bugs [Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8668] New: HTB Deadlock]
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:23:36PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >>@@ -202,7 +201,6 @@ void gen_kill_estimator(struct gnet_stats_basic
> >>*bstats,
> >> struct gen_estimator *est, **pest;
> >>
> >> for (idx=0; idx <= EST_MAX_INTERVAL; idx++) {
> >>- int killed = 0;
> >> pest = &elist[idx].list;
> >> while ((est=*pest) != NULL) {
> >
> >So, maybe this list walking here needs some locking too?
>
> It depends on whether estimators should be able to rely on
> the rtnl in the future or be completely responsible for their
> own locking. My patch yesterday was made under the assumption
> that they shouldn't rely on external locking, which seemed to
> be the right thing for a "generic" implementation. OTOH its
> still specific to networking, so relying on the rtnl doesn't
> sound too unreasonable too. I'm beginning to thing I made
> the wrong choice with my patch.
>
> I'm busy right now, would you mind looking into a patch that
> only deals with the timer races, but still relies on the
> rtnl?
In that case this patch looks OK & enough.
My earlier proposals are only of cosmetical value.
Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists