[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ada1vunt1sg.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:05:03 -0800
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: Andy Grover <andy.grover@...cle.com>
Cc: rds-devel@....oracle.com, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/21] RDS/IB: Receive datagrams via IB
> +static int rds_ib_recv_refill_one(struct rds_connection *conn,
> + struct rds_ib_recv_work *recv,
> + gfp_t kptr_gfp, gfp_t page_gfp)
> +{
> + struct rds_ib_connection *ic = conn->c_transport_data;
> + dma_addr_t dma_addr;
> + struct ib_sge *sge;
> + int ret = -ENOMEM;
> +
> + if (recv->r_ibinc == NULL) {
> + if (atomic_read(&rds_ib_allocation) >= rds_ib_sysctl_max_recv_allocation) {
> + rds_ib_stats_inc(s_ib_rx_alloc_limit);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + recv->r_ibinc = kmem_cache_alloc(rds_ib_incoming_slab,
> + kptr_gfp);
> + if (recv->r_ibinc == NULL)
> + goto out;
> + atomic_inc(&rds_ib_allocation);
This is racy. You check if you're at the limit, do the allocation, and
then increment the atomic rds_ib_allocation count. So many threads can
pass the atomic_read() test and then take you over the limit. If you
want to make it safe then you could do atomic_inc_return() and check if
that took you over the limit.
- R.
--
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