bond: relocate rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock

Started by zyjzyj2000@gmail.com on Feb 1, 2016 · 3 messages from 2 authors · Last reply Feb 1, 2016

Subsystems (3)

Maintainers (7)

Show 3 more
STALE3928d

open the first message on its own page

  1. [PATCH 1/1] bond: relocate rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock
    Related patches
From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>

rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock are to protect the function
bond_miimon_inspect. As such, moving rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock
to the function bond_miimon_inspect to make the source code compact.

CC: Jay Vosburgh <redacted>
CC: Veaceslav Falico <redacted>
CC: Andy Gospodarek <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
index 56b5605..4043181 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -2022,6 +2022,7 @@ static int bond_miimon_inspect(struct bonding *bond)
 	struct slave *slave;
 	bool ignore_updelay;
 
+	rcu_read_lock();
 	ignore_updelay = !rcu_dereference(bond->curr_active_slave);
 
 	bond_for_each_slave_rcu(bond, slave, iter) {
@@ -2113,6 +2114,8 @@ static int bond_miimon_inspect(struct bonding *bond)
 		}
 	}
 
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+
 	return commit;
 }
 
@@ -2231,12 +2234,9 @@ static void bond_mii_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
 	if (!bond_has_slaves(bond))
 		goto re_arm;
 
-	rcu_read_lock();
-
 	should_notify_peers = bond_should_notify_peers(bond);
 
 	if (bond_miimon_inspect(bond)) {
-		rcu_read_unlock();
 
 		/* Race avoidance with bond_close cancel of workqueue */
 		if (!rtnl_trylock()) {
@@ -2248,8 +2248,7 @@ static void bond_mii_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
 		bond_miimon_commit(bond);
 
 		rtnl_unlock();	/* might sleep, hold no other locks */
-	} else
-		rcu_read_unlock();
+	}
 
 re_arm:
 	if (bond->params.miimon)
-- 
1.9.1
On 02/01/2016 04:31 AM, zyjzyj2000@gmail.com wrote:
From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>

rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock are to protect the function
bond_miimon_inspect. As such, moving rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock
to the function bond_miimon_inspect to make the source code compact.

CC: Jay Vosburgh <redacted>
CC: Veaceslav Falico <redacted>
CC: Andy Gospodarek <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Not true, RCU also protects the slave dereference in bond_should_notify_peers().
Even though there's already a rcu_read_lock() while doing the dereference
itself, it is there only to please RCU, IIRC. The only "simplification" you
can do is remove the rcu_read_lock/unlock() around the slave deref in
bond_should_notify_peers and use rcu_dereference_rtnl() as it can be used either
in RCU protected region or with RTNL held. Also I think net-next is still
closed (and that's where this should be targeted at).

Cheers,
 Nik
On 02/01/2016 12:01 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
On 02/01/2016 04:31 AM, zyjzyj2000@gmail.com wrote:
quoted
From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>

rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock are to protect the function
bond_miimon_inspect. As such, moving rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock
to the function bond_miimon_inspect to make the source code compact.

CC: Jay Vosburgh <redacted>
CC: Veaceslav Falico <redacted>
CC: Andy Gospodarek <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Not true, RCU also protects the slave dereference in bond_should_notify_peers().
Even though there's already a rcu_read_lock() while doing the dereference
itself, it is there only to please RCU, IIRC. The only "simplification" you
Err, I meant to please lockdep when being called with RTNL.
can do is remove the rcu_read_lock/unlock() around the slave deref in
bond_should_notify_peers and use rcu_dereference_rtnl() as it can be used either
in RCU protected region or with RTNL held. Also I think net-next is still
closed (and that's where this should be targeted at).

Cheers,
 Nik
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help