From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 net-next] rhashtable: Avoid calculating hash again to unlock Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:15:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20150316.171500.2219680403539914280.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20150316.162202.2166849044626317059.davem@davemloft.net> <20150316204836.GA6534@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tgraf@suug.ch, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38445 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932779AbbCPVPD (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:15:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20150316204836.GA6534@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Herbert Xu Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 07:48:36 +1100 > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 04:22:02PM -0400, David Miller wrote: >> From: Thomas Graf >> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:42:26 +0100 >> >> > Caching the lock pointer avoids having to hash on the object >> > again to unlock the bucket locks. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf >> >> I'd like to hold off on this. >> >> My understanding is that Herbert plans to expand the table size >> synchonously during insert in emergency situations, and in that regime >> some of these optimization won't be valid. > > Actually this patch does not conflict with my multiple rehashing > work (the final scheme I used only requires two locks) so please > feel free to merge it and I will rebase my stuff. Ok, done, thanks.