Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757540Ab2FFSvO (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 14:51:14 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1025 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753410Ab2FFSvM (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 14:51:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 21:51:08 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Eric Dumazet , Jason Wang , netdev@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-net: fix a race on 32bit arches Message-ID: <20120606185107.GA20503@redhat.com> References: <1338971724.2760.3913.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1338972341.2760.3944.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120606111357.GA15070@redhat.com> <1338988210.2760.4485.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120606144941.GA17092@redhat.com> <20120606081432.6b602065@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120606081432.6b602065@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1156 Lines: 26 On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 08:14:32AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 17:49:42 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > Sounds good, but I have a question: this realies on counters > > being atomic on 64 bit. > > Would not it be better to always use a seqlock even on 64 bit? > > This way counters would actually be correct and in sync. > > As it is if we want e.g. average packet size, > > we can not rely e.g. on it being bytes/packets. > > This has not been a requirement on real physical devices; therefore > the added overhead is not really justified. > > Many network cards use counters in hardware to count packets/bytes > and there is no expectation of atomic access there. BTW for cards that do implement the counters in software, under xmit lock, is anything wrong with simply taking the xmit lock when we get the stats instead of the per-cpu trick + seqlock? -- 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/