On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 08:08:39AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> Well, it will fail before this point if memory is fragmented.
Indeed, I was surprised that it even worked up to that point,
possibly because the previous resizes might have actually been
done in process context.
> Anyway, __vmalloc
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 20:51 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 06:18:59PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >
> > OK that's better. I think I see the problem. The test in
> > rhashtable_insert_rehash is racy and if two threads both try
> > to grow the table one of them may be tricked in
From: Herbert Xu
> Sent: 03 December 2015 12:51
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 06:18:59PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >
> > OK that's better. I think I see the problem. The test in
> > rhashtable_insert_rehash is racy and if two threads both try
> > to grow the table one of them may be tricked into doi
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 06:18:59PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> OK that's better. I think I see the problem. The test in
> rhashtable_insert_rehash is racy and if two threads both try
> to grow the table one of them may be tricked into doing a rehash
> instead.
>
> I'm working on a fix.
While
