[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081218055617.GC6298@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:56:17 +0100
From: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
To: Micha? Miros?aw <mirqus@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, dccp@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] dccp: Auto-load (when supported) CCID plugins for
negotiation
| > Hence your suggestion does not improve the code. I maintain that it is
| > correct. And it has proven to work in the test tree for more than one
| > year, including tests with up to 100 parallel (iperf) connections.
|
| The read-lock is just a memory barrier here (not a read memory barrier
| as I wrote
| before) and it's not needed here. If I read the code correctly you are
| testing a single
| pointer to be NULL and don't really care about ordering wrt module
| initialization.
|
| You can actually annotate ccids[] as read_mostly (it's changed only on module
| load/unload) and protect it with RCU instead of the home-grown rwlock
| you are using.
|
Hm the details are not so important here. What is important is that your
observation and questioning whether the code makes sense has lead to
finding a deeper problem. Without your posting that may not have
happened. So many thanks indeed, if you have any more observations,
please keep them coming.
--
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