[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070629070241.GA1908@ff.dom.local>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:02:41 +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 02:55:51PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > 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) {
> >>>
...
> Its overkill in that case. The concurrent additions and removals
> can't happen.
BTW, if we talk about overkills: is there any reason to do these
for & while until the end? I can't see why anybody should add the
same *bstats & *rate_est more than once (or max twice if we let
to add, change & remove them independently). With a large number
of classes this could matter.
Regards,
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