Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 09:58:56 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <20181210.095856.580441946779980596.davem@davemloft.net>
To:     fw@strlen.de
Cc:     syzbot+592df0494801b6648ec6@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
        herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, steffen.klassert@secunet.com,
        syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: INFO: rcu detected stall in xfrm_hash_rebuild
From:   David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20181210124724.iuver2va3yjdsokf@breakpoint.cc>
References: <00000000000075fe86057ca6367e@google.com>
        <20181210124724.iuver2va3yjdsokf@breakpoint.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:47:24 +0100

> After recent tree conversion, we could probably make the exact policies
> part of the 'inexact tree' (which would be renamed to 'policy tree' or
> some such).
> 
> Special-casing the exact policies made a lot of sense when we had
> a single list for the inexact policies (to keep its length down).
> 
> But now I think we could try to unify all of this and only maintain
> the existing tree-based storage.
> 
> Would also remove the need to do lookups in two different
> data structures (bydst-hash-then-inexact-tree).
> 
> What do you think?

I think this makes a lot of sense.