[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1410151290.11872.80.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 21:41:30 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
Cc: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>,
Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 2/2] bonding: Simplify the xmit function for
modes that use xmit_hash
On Sun, 2014-09-07 at 19:23 -0700, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> >
> I'm not expecting any writer protection here since all the paths are
> covered with some or the other lock at this moment. Just though that
> performing array manipulation in RCU context would be useful.
It is not useful. It is confusing only.
If you think of RCU as a replacement for reader/writer lock, its obvious
that once you get the writer lock, there is no need to get the reader
lock.
Extract from Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt :
Use rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() to guard RCU
read-side critical sections.
Use some solid scheme (such as locks or semaphores) to
keep concurrent updates from interfering with each other.
--
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