From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: + gen_estimator-fix-locking-and-timer-related-bugs.patch added to -mm tree Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:20:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4693797C.1020408@trash.net> References: <1183727654.6389.3.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net> <468E4FD9.4060702@trash.net> <1183733732.6389.26.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net> <1183794918.30237.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1183984861.18656.21.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net> <46923DA8.9010208@trash.net> <1183999420.18656.54.camel@ranko-fc2.spidernet.net> <20070710073447.GA1870@ff.dom.local> <1184062147.11966.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070710121756.GB3130@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ranko Zivojnovic , akpm@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:58247 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751662AbXGJMUa (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:20:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070710121756.GB3130@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 01:09:07PM +0300, Ranko Zivojnovic wrote: > >>However I decided not to use _rcu based iteration neither the >>rcu_read_lock() after going through the RCU documentation and a bunch of >>examples in kernel that iterate through the lists using non _rcu macros >>and do list_del_rcu() just fine. >> >>For readability, the reference to list_del_rcu as well as call_rcu, I >>believe, should be enough of the indication. Please do correct me if I >>am wrong here. > > > It's only my opinion, and it's probably not very popular at least > at net/ code, so it's more about general policy and not this > particular code. But: > - if somebody is looking after some rcu related problems, why can't > he/she spare some time by omitting lists without _rcu and not > analyzing why/how such lists are used and locked? RCU is used for the read-side, using it on the write-side just makes things *less* understandable IMO. It will look like the read-side but still do modifications.