Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] bonding: convert to list API and replace bond's custom list
From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <hidden>
Date: 2013-07-31 19:00:42
On 07/31/2013 08:56 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 20:44:49 +0200 Nikolay Aleksandrov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 07/31/2013 08:37 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:quoted
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:12:29 +0200 Nikolay Aleksandrov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c index 390061d..80e288c 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c@@ -143,10 +143,13 @@ static inline struct bonding *__get_bond_by_port(struct port *port) */ static inline struct port *__get_first_port(struct bonding *bond) { + struct slave *first_slave; + if (bond->slave_cnt == 0) return NULL; + first_slave = bond_first_slave(bond);As Jay said, it would be be better to have bond_first_slave return NULL (if no slaves), and eliminate slave_cnt. It would also fix a race here between slave_cnt and all slave's being removed.Hi Stephen, First off - thank you for the review. What do you mean by eliminate slave_cnt ? We need it for various calculations throughout the bonding. There's no race here because read_lock(&bond->lock) is held every time this is called and slave_cnt can change only under write_lock of the same lock, the 3ad code is not yet converted to RCU. NikI would hope the goal would be to eliminate all read_lock's and allow it to be totally RCU based. You could then reduce slave_cnt to being only accessed by under a spin_lock when doing management actions.
Yes, that is the end goal. And my end-implementation does just that - removes curr_slave_lock completely and makes bond->lock a spinlock. But for now we need it for the parts that aren't converted, as I said in the beginning I'm doing the conversion gradually and there will be a special series that takes care of 3ad mode as there are many potential problems for RCU there because of its current design.