From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 6947: regressions - trouble:
	broken/fail/pass
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 15:09:10 +0100
Message-ID: <C9E5CB16.17266%keir.xen@gmail.com>
References: <4DC02118020000780003F666@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DC02118020000780003F666@vpn.id2.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 03/05/2011 14:36, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:

>> But the readers in irq context will call lookup_slot() without d->event_lock
>> held? In that case you do need an RCU-aware version of radix-tree.[ch],
>> because lookups can be occurring concurrently with insertions/deletions.
> 
> No, in IRQ context we only need the irq -> pirq translation afaics, and
> that translation doesn't use an allocated object (it instead simply inserts
> the [non-zero] pirq as data item).

Ah well that makes things easier. :-) If a single lock protects all
operations (including lookups) on a particular radix tree then of course we
don't need RCU.

 -- Keir