[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1345746078.2579.10.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 19:21:18 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <maheshb@...gle.com>,
<therbert@...gle.com>, <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: remove delay at device dismantle
On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 05:19 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>
> I noticed extra one second delay in device dismantle, tracked down to
> a call to dst_dev_event() while some call_rcu() are still in RCU queues.
>
> These call_rcu() were posted by rt_free(struct rtable *rt) calls.
>
> We then wait a little (but one second) in netdev_wait_allrefs() before
> kicking again NETDEV_UNREGISTER.
>
> As the call_rcu() are now completed, dst_dev_event() can do the needed
> device swap on busy dst.
>
> To solve this problem, add a new NETDEV_UNREGISTER_FINAL, called
> after a rcu_barrier(), but outside of RTNL lock.
[...]
So what happens when this races with register_netdevice_notifier()?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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