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 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).