Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755916AbZDOVzq (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:55:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754752AbZDOVzQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:55:16 -0400 Received: from sovereign.computergmbh.de ([85.214.69.204]:38315 "EHLO sovereign.computergmbh.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753895AbZDOVzN (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:55:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:55:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Eric Dumazet cc: Stephen Hemminger , Patrick McHardy , Jeff Chua , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, David Miller , paulus@samba.org, mingo@elte.hu, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, r000n@r000n.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3) In-Reply-To: <49E64C91.5020708@cosmosbay.com> Message-ID: References: <20090411174801.GG6822@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <18913.53699.544083.320542@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20090412173108.GO6822@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090412.181330.23529546.davem@davemloft.net> <20090413040413.GQ6822@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090413095309.631cf395@nehalam> <49E48136.5060700@trash.net> <49E49C65.8060808@cosmosbay.com> <20090414074554.7fa73e2f@nehalam> <49E4B0A5.70404@cosmosbay.com> <20090414111716.28585806@nehalam> <49E4E3E8.5090201@cosmosbay.com> <20090414141351.0f63ac98@nehalam> <49E502B5.7070700@cosmosbay.com> <49E5BDF7.8090502@trash.net> <20090415135526.2afc4d18@nehalam> <49E64C91.5020708@cosmosbay.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 809 Lines: 23 On Wednesday 2009-04-15 23:07, Eric Dumazet wrote: >Stephen Hemminger a écrit : >> Looks like there is some recursive path into ip_tables that makes the >> per-cpu spinlock break. I get lockup's with KVM networking. >> >> Suggestions? > >Well, it seems original patch was not so bad after all > >http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2006-January/023175.html > >So change per-cpu spinlocks to per-cpu rwlocks > >and use read_lock() in ipt_do_table() to allow recursion... > iptables cannot quite recurse into itself due to the comefrom stuff. -- 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/