Thread (6 messages) flat view 6 messages, 3 authors, 2019-10-18

Re: [RFC PATCH net] netns: fix GFP flags in rtnl_net_notifyid()

From: Guillaume Nault <hidden>
Date: 2019-10-18 23:29:32

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 01:55:46PM -0700, Pravin Shelar wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 3:22 PM Guillaume Nault [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The point of my RFC is to know if it's possible to avoid all these
gfp_t flags, by allowing ovs_vport_cmd_fill_info() to sleep (at least
I'd like to figure out if it's worth spending time investigating this
path).

To do so, we'd requires moving the ovs_vport_cmd_fill_info() call of
ovs_vport_cmd_{get,dump}() out of RCU critical section. Since we have
no reference counter, I believe we'd have to protect these calls with
ovs_lock() instead of RCU. Is that acceptable? If not, is there any
other way?
I do not see point of added complexity and serialized OVS flow dumps
just to avoid GFP_ATOMIC allocations in some code path. What is issue
passing the parameter as you have done in this patch?
Adding the gfp_t parameter certainly isn't complex, but that's still
code churn for the affected functions. And since only very few call
paths actually needed GFP_ATOMIC, I wanted to investigate the
possibility of converting them.

But I'm fine with keeping the patch as is. I'll repost it formally.

Thanks for your review.

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