Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756026AbZDRHg0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Apr 2009 03:36:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753791AbZDRHgP (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Apr 2009 03:36:15 -0400 Received: from gw1.cosmosbay.com ([212.99.114.194]:33127 "EHLO gw1.cosmosbay.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752103AbZDRHgO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Apr 2009 03:36:14 -0400 Message-ID: <49E982C4.8020407@cosmosbay.com> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:35:32 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Pirko CC: Stephen Hemminger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, davem@davemloft.net, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, fubar@us.ibm.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kaber@trash.net, mschmidt@redhat.com, ivecera@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: introduce a list of device addresses dev_addr_list (v3) References: <20090313183303.GF3436@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20090415081720.GA21342@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20090415081819.GB21342@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20090415180215.GA22540@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20090417115723.GE9556@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20090417083315.2f089755@nehalam> <20090418070151.GA3370@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20090418070151.GA3370@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (gw1.cosmosbay.com [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:35:33 +0200 (CEST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1543 Lines: 43 Jiri Pirko a ?crit : > Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 05:33:15PM CEST, shemminger@vyatta.com wrote: > > > >>> +struct netdev_hw_addr { >>> + struct list_head list; >>> + unsigned char addr[MAX_ADDR_LEN]; >>> + int refcount; >>> + struct rcu_head rcu_head; >>> +}; >> Minor nit, the ordering of elements cause holes that might not be >> needed. > > Agree that ordering might be done better. Will do. >> Space saving? is rcu_head needed or would using synchronize_net >> make code cleaner and save space. >> > > Well I originaly had this done by synchronize_rcu(). Eric argued that it might > cause especially __hw_addr_del_multiple_ii() to run long and suggested to use > call_rcu() instead. I plan to switch this to kfree_rcu() (or whatever it's > called) once it hits the tree. > Yes, and dont forget we wont save space, as we allocate a full cache line to hold a 'struct netdev_hw_addr', since we dont want this critical and read_mostly object polluted by a hot spot elsewhere in kernel... Considering this, letting 'rcu_head' at the end of structure, even if we have an eventual hole on 64 bit arches is not really a problem, and IMHO the best thing to do, as rcu_head is only used at dismantle time. And yes, maybe kfree_rcu() will makes its way in kernel, eventually :) 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/