On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 15:33 -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote: > Hi Sridhar > > Sridhar Samudrala wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 15:33 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 05:03:42PM -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote: > >>> [... and here is the updated version as promissed ...] > >>> > >>> Since the sctp_sockaddr_entry is now RCU enabled as part of > >>> the patch to synchronize sctp_localaddr_list, it makes sense to > >>> change all handling of these entries to RCU. This includes the > >>> sctp_bind_addrs structure and it's list of bound addresses. > >>> > >>> This list is currently protected by an external rw_lock and that > >>> looks like an overkill. There are only 2 writers to the list: > >>> bind()/bindx() calls, and BH processing of ASCONF-ACK chunks. > >>> These are already seriealized via the socket lock, so they will > >>> not step on each other. These are also relatively rare, so we > >>> should be good with RCU. > >>> > >>> The readers are varied and they are easily converted to RCU. > >> Looks good from an RCU viewpoint -- I must defer to others on > >> the networking aspects. > >> > >> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > looks good to me too. some minor typos and some comments on > > RCU usage comments inline. > > > > Also, I guess we can remove the sctp_[read/write]_[un]lock macros > > from sctp.h now that you removed the all the users of rwlocks > > in SCTP > > > > Looks like some of the hashing calls still use sctp_write_[un]lock > macros, but use normal read_lock() for the read side. > > I'll clean that up after these patches are accepted.
OK. You may also consider looking into the generic inet_hashtable infrastructure and see if we can use it for SCTP. Thanks Sridhar - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
