Re: [PATCH net-next 00/16] ipv6: replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6 table

2017-10-07 Thread David Miller
From: 吉藤英明 Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 18:25:13 +0900 > Hi, > > 2017-10-07 8:49 GMT+09:00 Eric Dumazet : >> On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 12:05 -0700, Wei Wang wrote: >>> From: Wei Wang >>> >>> Currently, fib6 table is protected by rwlock. During route lookup, >>> reader lock is taken and during route insert

Re: [PATCH net-next 00/16] ipv6: replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6 table

2017-10-07 Thread 吉藤英明
Hi, 2017-10-07 8:49 GMT+09:00 Eric Dumazet : > On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 12:05 -0700, Wei Wang wrote: >> From: Wei Wang >> >> Currently, fib6 table is protected by rwlock. During route lookup, >> reader lock is taken and during route insertion, deletion or >> modification, writer lock is taken. This

Re: [PATCH net-next 00/16] ipv6: replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6 table

2017-10-06 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 12:05 -0700, Wei Wang wrote: > From: Wei Wang > > Currently, fib6 table is protected by rwlock. During route lookup, > reader lock is taken and during route insertion, deletion or > modification, writer lock is taken. This is a very inefficient > implementation because the f

[PATCH net-next 00/16] ipv6: replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6 table

2017-10-06 Thread Wei Wang
From: Wei Wang Currently, fib6 table is protected by rwlock. During route lookup, reader lock is taken and during route insertion, deletion or modification, writer lock is taken. This is a very inefficient implementation because the fastpath always has to do the operation to grab the reader lock.