Re: [IPSEC] Move xfrm_flush_bundles into xfrm_state GC

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>]

Herbert Xu wrote:
> The locking in xfrm_state/xfrm_policy has always struck me as being
> an overkill.  A lot of the locks should be replaced by rules that
> ensure the validity of most operations while a ref count is held.
> Now I have an excuse to do just that :)

I agree, it really looks like slight overkill.

> For 2.6.12 let's go for a simpler fix that breaks the dead lock.
>
> __xfrm_state_delete does not need to flush the bundles immediately.
> In fact, it is more efficient if we delay the flush to the GC worker
> since the flush is not dependent on any particular xfrm state.  By
> delaying it we can do one single flush even when you're deleteing
> the entire xfrm state list.

Looks good to me.

Regards
Patrick