On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 07:21:08PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
This hook is protected with the RCU, so simple
if (br_should_route_hook)
br_should_route_hook(...)
is not enough on some architectures.
Use the rcu_dereference/rcu_assign_pointer in this case.
Fixed
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:04:20AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 07:21:08PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
This hook is protected with the RCU, so simple
if (br_should_route_hook)
br_should_route_hook(...)
is not enough on some architectures.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 06:36:50AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
That certainly is an interesting tradeoff... Save a memory barrier
when assigning NULL, but pay an extra test and branch in all cases.
Though it does make for a simpler rule -- just use rcu_assign_pointer()
in all cases. Of
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 10:49:00AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 06:36:50AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
That certainly is an interesting tradeoff... Save a memory barrier
when assigning NULL, but pay an extra test and branch in all cases.
Though it does make for a
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 05:25:01PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
You have in mind something like the following?
#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) \
({ \
if (!__builtin_constant_p(v) || \
((v) != NULL)) \
smp_wmb(); \
This hook is protected with the RCU, so simple
if (br_should_route_hook)
br_should_route_hook(...)
is not enough on some architectures.
Use the rcu_dereference/rcu_assign_pointer in this case.
Fixed Stephen's comment concerning using the typeof().
Signed-off-by: Pavel
