netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC][PATCH] identify in_dev_get rcu read-side critical sections

To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] identify in_dev_get rcu read-side critical sections
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:04:04 +1000
Cc: Suzanne Wood <suzannew@xxxxxxxxxx>, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, walpole@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050930003642.GQ8177@us.ibm.com>
References: <200509292330.j8TNUSmH019572@rastaban.cs.pdx.edu> <20050930002346.GP8177@us.ibm.com> <20050930002719.GC21062@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050930003642.GQ8177@us.ibm.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 05:36:42PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> >     rcu_read_lock();
> >     in_dev = dev->ip_ptr;
> >     if (in_dev) {
> >             in_dev = rcu_dereference(in_dev);
> >             atomic_inc(&in_dev->refcnt);
> >     }
> >     rcu_read_unlock();
> >     return in_dev;
> 
> How about:
> 
>       rcu_read_lock();
>       in_dev = dev->ip_ptr;
>       if (rcu_dereference(in_dev)) {
>               atomic_inc(&in_dev->refcnt);
>       }
>       rcu_read_unlock();
>       return in_dev;

With this the barrier will taken even when in_dev is NULL.

I agree this isn't such a big deal since it only impacts Alpha and then
only when in_dev is NULL.  But as we already do the branch anyway to
increment the reference count, we might as well make things a little
better for Alpha.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>