[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YRqKCVbjTZaSrSy+@unreal>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 18:53:45 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Guangbin Huang <huangguangbin2@...wei.com>,
Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>,
Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
Yufeng Mo <moyufeng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/6] devlink: Count struct devlink consumers
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 08:47:41AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 12:57:28 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> >
> > The struct devlink itself is protected by internal lock and doesn't
> > need global lock during operation. That global lock is used to protect
> > addition/removal new devlink instances from the global list in use by
> > all devlink consumers in the system.
> >
> > The future conversion of linked list to be xarray will allow us to
> > actually delete that lock, but first we need to count all struct devlink
> > users.
>
> Not a problem with this set but to state the obvious the global devlink
> lock also protects from concurrent execution of all the ops which don't
> take the instance lock (DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NO_LOCK). You most likely know
> this but I thought I'd comment on an off chance it helps.
The end goal will be something like that:
1. Delete devlink lock
2. Rely on xa_lock() while grabbing devlink instance (past devlink_try_get)
3. Convert devlink->lock to be read/write lock to make sure that we can run
get query in parallel.
4. Open devlink netlink to parallel ops, ".parallel_ops = true".
Thanks
>
> > The reference counting provides us a way to ensure that no new user
> > space commands success to grab devlink instance which is going to be
> > destroyed makes it is safe to access it without lock.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists