Re: correct locking in softirq
flat view
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2009-02-27 08:29:24
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 08:54 +0100, Giacomo wrote:
Good morning Harald Welte's "The journey of a packet through the Linux 2.6.10 network stack" article says that packet travelling inside linux kernel 2.6 (the receive / input part) runs in softirq context. Hooking with netfilter's hooks in a kernel module, i need to read for each packet received a list of rules. Since in input and prerouting hooks the context is softirq (perhaps also in forward?), I need some read lock feature. I currently use RCU lists and, while reading lists I use READ read_lock_bh() together with list_for_each_rcu() When changing, or flushing, rules, I use WRITE spin_lock() + list_add_tail_rcu() (adding) or spin_lock() + list_for_each_entry() (for listing and then freeing with list_del_rcu() and call_rcu() ) The question is: - is the read part above correct? - do I really need _bh()? or should I use simply read_lock() ? Thanks in advance
rcu_read_lock() + call_rcu() are correct, even from softirq context, and mandatory if anything is exposed to anything other than softirq context. rcu_read_lock_bh() + call_rcu_bh() is usable IFF the data is only ever used from softirq. The distinction between the two RCU variants is that the _bh variant can have a slightly faster quiescent cycle.