From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl0-f43.google.com ([209.85.160.43]:41953 "EHLO mail-pl0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751812AbeCWN35 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 09:29:57 -0400 Received: by mail-pl0-f43.google.com with SMTP id b7-v6so7422427plr.8 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 06:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [bpf-next V5 PATCH 11/15] page_pool: refurbish version of page_pool code To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer , netdev@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuVMO2cGVs?= , magnus.karlsson@intel.com Cc: eugenia@mellanox.com, Jason Wang , John Fastabend , Eran Ben Elisha , Saeed Mahameed , galp@mellanox.com, Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Tariq Toukan References: <152180742196.20167.5168801400337773178.stgit@firesoul> <152180753479.20167.856688163861554435.stgit@firesoul> From: Eric Dumazet Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 06:29:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152180753479.20167.856688163861554435.stgit@firesoul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/23/2018 05:18 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > + > +void page_pool_destroy_rcu(struct page_pool *pool) > +{ > + call_rcu(&pool->rcu, __page_pool_destroy_rcu); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_destroy_rcu); > Why do we need to respect one rcu grace period before destroying a page pool ? In any case, this should be called page_pool_destroy()