From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
To: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@ixiacom.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Lucian Adrian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@gmail.com>,
Vlad Dogaru <ddvlad@rosedu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: add dev_close_many
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:32:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101213093221.5d941493@nehalam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201012131923.27337.opurdila@ixiacom.com>
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:23:26 +0200
Octavian Purdila <opurdila@ixiacom.com> wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Date: Monday 13 December 2010, 18:52:25
>
> > Hmm, I think this solves the "rmmod dummy" case, but not the "dismantle
> > devices one by one", which is the general one (on heavy duty tunnels/ppp
> > servers)
> >
> > I think we could use a kernel thread (a workqueue presumably), handling
> > 3 lists of devices to be dismantled, respecting one rcu grace period (or
> > rcu_barrier()) before transfert of one item from one list to following
> > one.
> >
> > This way, each device removal could post a device to this kernel thread
> > and return to user immediately. Time of RTNL hold would be reduced
> > (calls to synchronize_rcu() would be done with RTNL not held)
>
> We also run into the case where we have to dismantle the interfaces one by one
> but we fix it by gathering the requests in userspace and then doing a
> unregister_netdevice_many operation.
>
> I like the kernel thread / workqueue idea. But we would still need
> netdevice_unregister_many and dev_close_many right? - we put the device in the
> unregister list in unregister_netdevice and call unregister_netdevice_many in
> the kernel thread.
With a message based interface, there shouldn't be a need for this.
Just have one thread sending requests in user space, and one receiving
the ACK's.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-13 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-13 14:18 [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: add dev_close_many Octavian Purdila
2010-12-13 16:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-12-13 17:23 ` Octavian Purdila
2010-12-13 17:32 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2010-12-13 17:52 ` Octavian Purdila
2010-12-13 18:04 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-12-13 20:54 ` Octavian Purdila
2010-12-13 23:34 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-12-13 17:54 ` David Miller
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=20101213093221.5d941493@nehalam \
--to=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=ddvlad@rosedu.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=lucian.grijincu@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=opurdila@ixiacom.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).