Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752311AbbH3Hrh (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Aug 2015 03:47:37 -0400 Received: from helcar.hengli.com.au ([209.40.204.226]:56024 "EHLO helcar.hengli.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751309AbbH3Hrg (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Aug 2015 03:47:36 -0400 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 15:47:17 +0800 From: Herbert Xu To: Phil Sutter Cc: tgraf@suug.ch, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com, wfg@linux.intel.com, lkp@01.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] rhashtable-test: retry insert operations in threads Message-ID: <20150830074717.GA25396@gondor.apana.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150829090701.GN20760@orbit.nwl.cc> Organization: Core X-Newsgroups: apana.lists.os.linux.kernel,apana.lists.os.linux.netdev User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 903 Lines: 23 Phil Sutter wrote: > > Should we introduce a new field to struct rhashtable to track the > internal state? This might allow to clean up some rather obscure tests, > e.g. whether a table resize is in progress or not. Why would we want to do that? The deferred expansion is done on a best effort basis so its failure has nothing to do with the failure of a subsequent insertion. The insertion must have tried its own last-ditch synchronous expansion and only fail if that fails. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/