To: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl
Cc: junwang1234@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Sleeping in RCU list traversal
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
References: <1191784307.3618.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<200710072226.EJF51558.LFVHJOStFOOFMQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
	<1191796640.3045.25.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<200710080156.IFB56934.tHMLFFJSFOVOOQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
	<1191781996.5587.3.camel@lappy>
In-Reply-To: <1191781996.5587.3.camel@lappy>
Message-Id: <200710080456.DFE30787.OJFtFHMLFSOQOV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 04:56:12 +0900
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1112
Lines: 26

Hello.

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So, I don't need to grab a reference to "ptr"
> > because memory region pointed by "ptr" will never be kfree()ed.
> > And it is legal to use "ptr" after rcu_read_unlock()
> > because memory region pointed by "ptr" will never be kfree()ed.
> 
> Still think that is a very BAD (tm) idea. Esp since with the help of RCU
> there is hardly any performance loss of not doing proper deletes.
> 
Elements I keep in RCU list are policy table for access control
that are referred throughout the lifetime of the kernel.
So, there is hardly any needs to delete these elements.
Honestly speaking, I don't need to use RCU list at all.
Just using a singly linked list that doesn't support deletion is enough.
But James Morris advises me to use the existing API
( http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/2/156 http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/3/124 ).

Thank you.

-
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/