From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5 net-next] rhashtable: Extend RCU read lock into rhashtable_insert_rehash() Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:40:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20150324194044.GD19251@casper.infradead.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au To: davem@davemloft.net Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:37788 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752459AbbCXTkp (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:40:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/24/15 at 02:18pm, Thomas Graf wrote: > @@ -585,8 +585,8 @@ restart: > if (unlikely(rht_grow_above_100(ht, tbl))) { > slow_path: > spin_unlock_bh(lock); > - rcu_read_unlock(); > err = rhashtable_insert_rehash(ht); > + rcu_read_unlock(); > if (err) > return err; An alternative would be to start a new RCU section inside rhashtable_insert_rehash(). This was the easier fix but I'm fine either way.