From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix locking in flush_backlog Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:14:04 +0100 Message-ID: <1269360844.2983.294.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <1269325757.3043.11.camel@edumazet-laptop> <65634d661003230856v3d1737dehf64a883c1e785333@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Herbert Return-path: Received: from mail-px0-f184.google.com ([209.85.216.184]:37898 "EHLO mail-px0-f184.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754555Ab0CWQOJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:14:09 -0400 Received: by pxi14 with SMTP id 14so4137339pxi.15 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:14:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <65634d661003230856v3d1737dehf64a883c1e785333@mail.gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le mardi 23 mars 2010 =C3=A0 08:56 -0700, Tom Herbert a =C3=A9crit : > Eric, >=20 > I'm not sure what you're asking. Do you just want to add spinlocks i= n > the flush_backlog function without changing the mechanism to call the > function on each CPU, or keep flush_backlog but call it from > netdev_run_todo for each queue? >=20 keep flush_backlog() so that its role is obvious and indentation level not too big. static void flush_backlog(int cpu) { struct softnet_data *queue =3D &per_cpu(softnet_data, cpu); struct sk_buff *skb, *tmp; unsigned long flags; spin_lock_irqsave(&queue->input_pkt_queue.lock, flags); skb_queue_walk_safe(&queue->input_pkt_queue, skb, tmp) if (skb->dev =3D=3D dev) { __skb_unlink(skb, &queue->input_pkt_queue); kfree_skb(skb); } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&queue->input_pkt_queue.lock, flags); } And call it from netdev_run_todo() : for_each_online_cpu(i) flush_backlog(i); This adds two lines to netdev_run_todo() only. Thanks