On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 02:24:16PM -0700, Joe Eykholt wrote: > Robert Love wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 10:40 -0700, Chris Leech wrote: > >> Rather than rely on the hostlist_lock to be held while creating exchange > >> managers, serialize fcoe instance creation and destruction with a mutex. > >> This will allow the hostlist addition to be moved out of fcoe_if_create(), > >> which will simplify NPIV support. > >> > > Is there a reason that we don't use the rtnl_lock for protection? It's > > already held when we get the NETDEV_UNREGISTER event (added in patch > > 13/13). I believe that doing so would remove the need to defer the > > fcoe_destroy() call since the deferral is only needed so that we don't > > grab the rtnl_lock twice. > > I considered that, too. It seems a bit like a layering violation to use > it to protect create/delete/exit, but maybe it's OK to do since we > need to grab rtnl_lock anyway. > > In fcoe_exit() we would have to be careful because > unregister_netdevice_notifier() does rtnl_lock(), > but if we did the unregister before grabbing rtnl_lock, > that would be OK. > > It could completely eliminate the need for hostlist_lock and create_lock, > so it seems like a nice idea.
I thought there was somewhere outside of create/destroy that the host-list was being read, but it might just have been the module exit case. Removing the lock and only having one mutex for all this would be cool. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
