From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Cc: Ranko Zivojnovic <ranko@spidernet.net>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + gen_estimator-fix-locking-and-timer-related-bugs.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:51:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070710135152.GD3130@ff.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070710131033.GC3130@ff.dom.local>
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 03:10:34PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 02:20:12PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> > Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 01:09:07PM +0300, Ranko Zivojnovic wrote:
> > >
> > >>However I decided not to use _rcu based iteration neither the
> > >>rcu_read_lock() after going through the RCU documentation and a bunch of
> > >>examples in kernel that iterate through the lists using non _rcu macros
> > >>and do list_del_rcu() just fine.
> > >>
> > >>For readability, the reference to list_del_rcu as well as call_rcu, I
> > >>believe, should be enough of the indication. Please do correct me if I
> > >>am wrong here.
> > >
> > >
> > > It's only my opinion, and it's probably not very popular at least
> > > at net/ code, so it's more about general policy and not this
> > > particular code. But:
> > > - if somebody is looking after some rcu related problems, why can't
> > > he/she spare some time by omitting lists without _rcu and not
> > > analyzing why/how such lists are used and locked?
> >
> >
> > RCU is used for the read-side, using it on the write-side just makes
> > things *less* understandable IMO. It will look like the read-side
> > but still do modifications.
> >
>
> From Documentation/RCU/checklist:
>
> "9. All RCU list-traversal primitives, which include
> list_for_each_rcu(), list_for_each_entry_rcu(),
> list_for_each_continue_rcu(), and list_for_each_safe_rcu(),
> must be within an RCU read-side critical section. RCU
> read-side critical sections are delimited by rcu_read_lock()
> and rcu_read_unlock(), or by similar primitives such as
> rcu_read_lock_bh() and rcu_read_unlock_bh().
...But, on the other hand, Ranko didn't use any of these primitives...
So, first I said he should use this, and than I asked why there was
no rcu_read_locks around... I really start to amaze with my consistency.
I hope some day you'll forgive me (no hurry, I can wait).
Cheers,
Jarek P.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-10 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200706271921.l5RJLgCC003910@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <1183642800.3789.11.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net>
[not found] ` <20070705142135.GG4759@ff.dom.local>
[not found] ` <1183646029.4069.11.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net>
[not found] ` <1183651165.4069.26.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net>
2007-07-06 6:14 ` + gen_estimator-fix-locking-and-timer-related-bugs.patch added to -mm tree Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 6:20 ` Fwd: " Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 6:26 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 6:45 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 12:47 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 13:16 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-09 8:25 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-06 13:14 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-06 13:27 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-06 13:59 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-06 14:21 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-06 14:55 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-07 7:55 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-07 15:10 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-09 7:47 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-09 12:41 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-09 13:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-09 16:43 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-09 16:54 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-10 7:34 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-10 10:09 ` Ranko Zivojnovic
2007-07-10 12:17 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-10 12:20 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-10 13:10 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-07-10 13:51 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
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=20070710135152.GD3130@ff.dom.local \
--to=jarkao2@o2.pl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ranko@spidernet.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).