From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ding Tianhong Subject: [PATCH net-next v4 3/11] bonding: rebuild the lock use for bond_alb_monitor() Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 15:45:39 +0800 Message-ID: <52A2D223.8050707@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jay Vosburgh , Andy Gospodarek , "David S. Miller" , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Veaceslav Falico , Netdev Return-path: Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.64]:64639 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751607Ab3LGHvR (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Dec 2013 02:51:17 -0500 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: The bond_alb_monitor use bond lock to protect the bond slave list, it is no effect here, we need to use RTNL or RCU to replace bond lock, the bond_alb_monitor will called 10 times one second, RTNL may loss performance here, so I replace bond lock with RCU to protect the bond slave list, also the RTNL is preserved, the logic of the monitor did not changed. Suggested-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov Suggested-by: Jay Vosburgh Suggested-by: Veaceslav Falico Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong --- drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c | 22 +++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c index 1fae915..8a85064 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c @@ -816,7 +816,7 @@ static void rlb_rebalance(struct bonding *bond) for (; hash_index != RLB_NULL_INDEX; hash_index = client_info->used_next) { client_info = &(bond_info->rx_hashtbl[hash_index]); - assigned_slave = rlb_next_rx_slave(bond); + assigned_slave = __rlb_next_rx_slave(bond); if (assigned_slave && (client_info->slave != assigned_slave)) { client_info->slave = assigned_slave; client_info->ntt = 1; @@ -1495,14 +1495,14 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) struct list_head *iter; struct slave *slave; - read_lock(&bond->lock); - if (!bond_has_slaves(bond)) { bond_info->tx_rebalance_counter = 0; bond_info->lp_counter = 0; goto re_arm; } + rcu_read_lock(); + bond_info->tx_rebalance_counter++; bond_info->lp_counter++; @@ -1515,7 +1515,7 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) */ read_lock(&bond->curr_slave_lock); - bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, iter) + bond_for_each_slave_rcu(bond, slave, iter) alb_send_learning_packets(slave, slave->dev->dev_addr); read_unlock(&bond->curr_slave_lock); @@ -1528,7 +1528,7 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) read_lock(&bond->curr_slave_lock); - bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, iter) { + bond_for_each_slave_rcu(bond, slave, iter) { tlb_clear_slave(bond, slave, 1); if (slave == bond->curr_active_slave) { SLAVE_TLB_INFO(slave).load = @@ -1552,11 +1552,9 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) * dev_set_promiscuity requires rtnl and * nothing else. Avoid race with bond_close. */ - read_unlock(&bond->lock); - if (!rtnl_trylock()) { - read_lock(&bond->lock); + rcu_read_unlock(); + if (!rtnl_trylock()) goto re_arm; - } bond_info->rlb_promisc_timeout_counter = 0; @@ -1568,7 +1566,7 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) bond_info->primary_is_promisc = 0; rtnl_unlock(); - read_lock(&bond->lock); + rcu_read_lock(); } if (bond_info->rlb_rebalance) { @@ -1590,11 +1588,9 @@ void bond_alb_monitor(struct work_struct *work) } } } - + rcu_read_unlock(); re_arm: queue_delayed_work(bond->wq, &bond->alb_work, alb_delta_in_ticks); - - read_unlock(&bond->lock); } /* assumption: called before the slave is attached to the bond -- 1.8.2.1