lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] (1/8) Eliminate brlock in psnap
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Stephen Hemminger wrote:

> void unregister_snap_client(struct datalink_proto *proto)
> {
> - br_write_lock_bh(BR_NETPROTO_LOCK);
> + static RCU_HEAD(snap_rcu);
>
> - list_del(&proto->node);
> - kfree(proto);
> + spin_lock_bh(&snap_lock);
> + list_del_rcu(&proto->node);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&snap_lock);
>
> - br_write_unlock_bh(BR_NETPROTO_LOCK);
> + call_rcu(&snap_rcu, (void (*)(void *)) kfree, proto);
> }

Do we need the spin_lock_bh around the list_del_rcu? But also How
about. This way we don't change the previous characteristic of block till
done unregistering

struct datalink_proto {
...
struct completion registration;
};
void __unregister_snap_client(void *__proto)
{
struct datalink_proto *proto = __proto;
complete(&proto->registration);
}
unregister_snap_client(struct datalink_proto *proto)
{
list_del_rcu(&proto->node);
call_rcu(&snap_rcu, __unregister_snap_client, proto);
wait_for_completion(&proto->registration);
kfree(proto);
}
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:33    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans