[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150116213605.GE20315@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:36:05 +0000
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"john.r.fastabend@...el.com" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
"josh@...htriplett.org" <josh@...htriplett.org>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] rhashtable: Per bucket locks & deferred
expansion/shrinking
On 01/16/15 at 07:35pm, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> On 16.01, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > Right,but that's a Netlink dump issue and not specific to rhashtable.
>
> Well, rhashtable (or generally resizing) will make it a lot worse.
> Usually we at worst miss entries which were added during the dump,
> which is made up by the notifications.
>
> With resizing we might miss anything, its completely undeterministic.
>
> > Putting the sequence number check in place should be sufficient
> > for sets, right?
>
> I don't see how. The problem is that the ordering of the hash changes
> and it will skip different entries than those that have already been
> dumped.
Since an resize can only be triggered through insert/remove you
simply bump a sequence number when you insert/remove and have
userspace restart the dump when NLM_F_DUMP_INTR is set.
--
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