Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:51:35 -0500
From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] synchronize_rcu(): high latency on idle system
Message-ID: <20080112175135.GK28570@kvack.org>
References: <20080112012626.GI28570@kvack.org> <20080112023759.GG21068@bingen.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080112023759.GG21068@bingen.suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 975
Lines: 23

On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 03:37:59AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > And yes, the 
> > network stack shouldn't call synchronize_rcu() quite so much, but fixing that 
> > is a little more involved.
> 
> ... but the correct solution.

There has to be at least 1 synchronize_rcu() or equivalent in the 
unregister_netdev() path.  I suspect the easiest way to fix it might be to 
use call_rcu() to actually free the network device, as anything else will 
limit performance of single threaded teardown (ie, when an l2tp daemon 
gets terminated via kill -9).  This means an API change that exposes 
rcu for unregister_netdev().

		-ben
-- 
"Time is of no importance, Mr. President, only life is important."
Don't Email: <zyntrop@kvack.org>.
--
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/