On 7/28/26 3:12 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 9:05 AM Paolo Abeni [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On 7/28/26 2:37 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 6:34 AM Paolo Abeni [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Since there is already a
synchronization point for both reader and write while acquiring the
fastmap_lock, I'm wondering if something alike the following could work ?!?
(completely untested!!!):
Your approach has some holes, example misses the most dangerous part -
destroy(), etc
I will mull over it and see if it can be fixed to handle all the
issues. I think it's possible i just need to put time to
validate/test.
I would appreciate that, thanks!
See attached. Untested (compiles) - addresses my destroy() concern
eaerlier _i think_ (unless something pops up in testing)
FWIW, the changes LGTM, thanks!
Paolo