lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [openib-general] Re: [git patch review 1/4] IPoIB: Don't start send-only joins while multicast thread is stopped
Quoting r. Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>:
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: [git patch review 1/4] IPoIB: Don't start send-only joins while multicast thread is stopped
>
> Michael> Basically, its as Andrew said: the lock around clear_bit
> Michael> is there to ensure that ipoib_mcast_send isnt running
> Michael> already when we stop the thread. Thats why test_bit has
> Michael> to be inside the lock, too.
>
> Makes sense I guess. If I'm understanding correctly, the lock isn't
> really there to serialize the bit ops, but rather to make sure
> ipoib_mcast_send() won't do anything after we clear the bit.

Right. Thats one way to put it.

> Does that mean that there's no reason to take the lock around the set_bit()?

Ugh, sorry, I dont really remember why I put it there.

I guess I just have easier time reasoning about locks than barriers and atomic
operations. "bit is protected by priv->lock" is a simple rule, and we are not on
data path here. The fact that the race went unnoticed for a while validates
this approach in my eyes.

I guess longer term we will replace mcast_mutex with priv->lock anyway, so it
doesnt matter much.

--
Michael S. Tsirkin
Staff Engineer, Mellanox Technologies
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-12 17:58    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans