From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1][PKT_CLS] Avoid multiple tree locks Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:17:37 +0100 Message-ID: <46010641.3000009@trash.net> References: <1174471116.16343.10.camel@localhost> <4601047A.6050108@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:38979 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751786AbXCUKRq (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Mar 2007 06:17:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4601047A.6050108@trash.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Patrick McHardy wrote: > jamal wrote: > >>Seems to have been around a while. IMO, mterial for 2.6.21 but not >>stable. I have only compile-tested but it looks right(tm). > > > > Its harmless since its a read lock, which can be nested. I actually > don't see any need for qdisc_tree_lock at all, all changes and all > walking is done under the RTNL, which is why I've removed it in > my (upcoming) patches. I suggest to leave it as is for now so I > don't need to change the __qdisc_lookup back to qdisc_lookup in > 2.6.22. Alexey just explained to me why we do need qdisc_tree_lock in private mail. While dumping only the first skb is filled under the RTNL, while filling further skbs we don't hold the RTNL anymore. So I will probably have to drop that patch.