Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v2] pkt_sched: gen_estimator: kill est_lock rwlock

[Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>]

Le mardi 08 juin 2010 à 21:29 +0200, Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 06/08/2010 02:40 PM:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 02:27:32PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> Le mardi 08 juin 2010 ?? 12:15 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Actually, I guess, Changli meant the bug introduced by your previous
> >>> patch by removing the est_lock. With this lock (and your commit 5d944)
> >>> bstats (and API) seem "fundamentaly" safe.
> >>>
> >> Sorry, I have no idea of what you want to say, I cant find commit 5d944.
> >>
> > 
> > Sorry, I meant the commit mentioned in your changelog which was quoted.
> > 
> >> This was partially addressed in commit 5d944c640b4 (gen_estimator:
> >> deadlock fix), but same problem exist for all gen_kill_estimator()
> >> users.
> 
> In case it's still unclear, I wanted to say that IMHO this patch's
> title and changelog are misleading because most of its content are
> est_lock to RCU changes - not fixes.
> 

...

> >> [PATCH net-next-2.6] pkt_sched: gen_kill_estimator() rcu fixes
> >> 
> >> gen_kill_estimator() API is fundamentaly wrong, since caller should make
> >> sure an RCU grace period is respected before freeing bstats or lock.
> 
> Freeing bstats doesn't currently require RCU protection.
> 
> Jarek P.

So what ? No changes needed ?

I am really lost by your comments Jarek.

Maybe you could provide an alternative patch, so that we can make some
progress ?