[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091120220851.GA4717@ami.dom.local>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:08:51 +0100
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: Xmit Packet Steering (XPS)
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:43:55PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 03:45:42PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> >>> On 20-11-2009 00:46, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >>> scheduled) IPIs?
> >> Repeat after me :
> >>
> >> lockdep is my friend, lockdep is my friend, lockdep is my friend... :)
> >
> > Hmm... Actually, why did I have to do lockdep's job...
>
> In fact I could not find why irq masking is necessary, and lockdep is
> fine with my code and my testings. Care to explain what problem you spotted ?
>
CPU1 CPU2
net_rx_action() net_rx_action()
xps_flush() xps_flush()
q = &per_cpu(xps_pcpu_queue, cpu2) q = &per_cpu(xps_pcpu_queue, cpu1)
spin_lock(&q->list.lock of cpu2) spin_lock(&q->list.lock of cpu1)
<IPI> <IPI>
remote_free_skb_list() remote_free_skb_list()
waiting on spin_lock(&q->list.lock of cpu1) waiting on spin_lock(&q->list.lock of cpu2)
IPIs triggerered e.g. by CPU3 (or/and CPU4...) doing net_rx_action as well.
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