[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1012152305360.1827@ja.ssi.bg>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:11:19 +0200 (EET)
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
To: Hans Schillstrom <hans.schillstrom@...csson.com>
cc: "horms@...ge.net.au" <horms@...ge.net.au>,
"daniel.lezcano@...e.fr" <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
"wensong@...ux-vs.org" <wensong@...ux-vs.org>,
"lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org" <lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hans@...illstrom.com" <hans@...illstrom.com>
Subject: Re: [*v2 PATCH 00/22] IPVS, Network Name Space aware
Hello,
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
>> v2 PATCH 13/22 - ip_vs_est
>> - estimation_timer: what protection is needed for for_each_net?
>> It is rtnl for user context and RCU for softirq?
>> May be est_timer must be per NS? Now may be rcu_read_lock is
>> needed before for_each_net_rcu ? for_each_net can be called
>> only under rtnl_lock?
>>
> [snip]
>
> In case of a common timer for all ns:
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_net_rcu(net) {
> ...
>
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> I guess it's better with a timer per netns ?
Yes, I too have little preference for the per-ns timer.
> (then for_each_net() is not needed, and the locking can remain the same
> as before the netns change.)
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
--
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