On 12/14/2016 12:20 PM, Ying Xue wrote: > On 12/14/2016 03:26 AM, Parthasarathy Bhuvaragan wrote: >>> > In my opinion, the ideal order is still as belows: >>> > >>> > 1, Close connection; >>> > 2. Call tipc_unregister_callbacks to let sk->sk_user_data. As long as >>> > sk->sk_user_data is 0, no more data will be submitted to >>> > con->rwork/on->swork works. >>> > 3. Release socket. >> Yes, with your proposed change the soft lockup reported by John will go >> away but it does not avoid the problem which is fixed by commit >> 333f796235a527. As long as we yield and let the scheduler schedule a new >> work item, we will break the single threaded work queue assumption. >> >> I tested with the proposed ideal order and does not fix the fault >> fixed by commit 333f796235a527. >> > > I know. I think we probably can add reference counter into > tipc_subscription structure to solve the issue fixed by 333f796235a527 > commit. > > What do you think? I have an idea to fix 333f796235a527 in a simple way and keep your proposal for John's issue. Now running some tests on it.
/Partha > > Regards, > Ying > >> Thanks for the review. I will spend some more time to find a simpler >> solution for both. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ tipc-discussion mailing list tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion
