[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110324081539.47ad0972@nehalam>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:15:39 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@...i.com>,
Brice Goglin <brice@...i.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] myri10ge: small rx_done refactoring
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:16:21 +0100
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 08:33:57AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:52:04 +0100
> > Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Add lro_enable variable to read NETIF_F_LRO flag only once per napi poll
> > > call. This should fix theoretical race condition with
> > > myri10ge_set_rx_csum() and myri10ge_set_flags() where flag NETIF_F_LRO
> > > can be changed.
> >
> > You may need a barrier or the race may still be there.
>
> I don't understand why barrier in that case is need.
>
> What I tried to avoid is.
>
> myri10ge_clean_rx_done():
>
> if (dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO)
> setup lro
> myri10ge_set_flags()
>
> if (dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO)
> flush lro
>
> Now we read dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO only once to local
> lro_enabled variable. So we can not flush without setup
> or setup without flush. No idea why memory barries is still
> needed.
>
> > The driver seems to use mb() where wmb() is intended, and never use rmb()?
>
> Yes, I think we can have some optimalization here.
>
Without barrier there is no guarantee that compiler read the flags
into a local variable. It is free to do the same thing as the original
code.
--
--
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