From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardware dropsrxpackets
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 05:49:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090515054947.GA4497@ff.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090514172954.GA3867@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
On 14-05-2009 19:29, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 02:44:08PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Clean the device list
>>> + */
>>> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(new_stat, &hw_stats_list, list) {
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> This is meaningless here. Use list_for_each_entry_rcu only under rcu_read_lock.
>> Also it would be good to use list_for_each_entry_safe here since you're
>> modifying the list.
>>
>
> The definition of list_for_each_entry_rcu specifically says its safe against
> list-mutation primitives, so its fine. Although you are correct, in that its
> safety is dependent on the protection of rcu_read_lock(), so I'll add that in.
> Thanks for the catch! New patch attached
>
> Change notes:
> 1) Add rcu_read_lock/unlock protection around TRACE_OFF event
>
> Neil
...
> static int set_all_monitor_traces(int state)
> {
> int rc = 0;
> + struct dm_hw_stat_delta *new_stat = NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&trace_state_lock);
>
> switch (state) {
> case TRACE_ON:
> rc |= register_trace_kfree_skb(trace_kfree_skb_hit);
> + rc |= register_trace_napi_poll(trace_napi_poll_hit);
> break;
> case TRACE_OFF:
> rc |= unregister_trace_kfree_skb(trace_kfree_skb_hit);
> + rc |= unregister_trace_napi_poll(trace_napi_poll_hit);
>
> tracepoint_synchronize_unregister();
> +
> + /*
> + * Clean the device list
> + */
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(new_stat, &hw_stats_list, list) {
> + if (new_stat->dev == NULL) {
> + list_del_rcu(&new_stat->list);
> + call_rcu(&new_stat->rcu, free_dm_hw_stat);
> + }
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
IMHO it looks worse now. rcu_read_lock() suggests it's a read side,
and spin_lock(&trace_state_lock) protects something else.
Jarek P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-15 5:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-08 19:50 [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardware drops rx packets Neil Horman
2009-05-09 6:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-09 18:07 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-12 16:30 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardware drops rxpackets Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-14 0:45 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-14 1:03 ` [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardware dropsrxpackets Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-14 12:33 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-14 12:44 ` Jiri Pirko
2009-05-14 16:17 ` [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardwaredropsrxpackets Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-14 17:29 ` [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardware dropsrxpackets Neil Horman
2009-05-15 5:49 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2009-05-15 11:01 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 11:12 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-05-15 11:15 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 11:40 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-05-16 0:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-15 6:51 ` Jiri Pirko
2009-05-15 7:37 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-15 11:12 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 10:59 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 11:27 ` Jiri Pirko
2009-05-15 16:07 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 18:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-15 18:23 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-05-15 19:53 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 19:23 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-16 12:40 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-18 14:46 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-21 7:17 ` David Miller
2009-05-21 17:36 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-21 22:15 ` David Miller
2009-05-22 0:09 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-15 18:18 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-05-15 19:12 ` Neil Horman
2009-05-14 16:18 ` [PATCH] dropmon: add ability to detect when hardwaredropsrxpackets Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090515054947.GA4497@ff.dom.local \
--to=jarkao2@gmail.com \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jpirko@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.