On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 02:58:08PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Yang Shi <shy828...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> > I recalled Steven confirmed raw_spin_lock has the lockdep benefit too in >> > the >> > patch review for changing to raw lock. >> > >> > Please check this thread out >> > http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2015/10/31/7 >> >> OK, looks I was wrong about the lockdep benifit, :-( >> >> But for this lock, I think lockdep isn't such important, because it is the >> intermost lock, and it can be used just for protecting the bucket list >> and nothing else need to be covered. > > I still think that overhead of normal spinlock per bucket is acceptable. > Makes the whole thing much easier to read.
OK, let's use per-bucket spinlock first. -- Ming Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
