On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 11:23:43AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> kmem_cache_free() directly. For this, I need rhashtable to be safe if
> an object is deleted and immediately re-inserted into the same hash
> chain.
This means that
rcu_read_lock();
A = rhashtable_lookup();
use(A);
rcu_read_unlock();
A can turn into object B when it is used. That is just too strange
for words. Can we see some actual code on how this works?
For comparison, the existing net code where this happens A doesn't
actually change and it simply moves from one hashtable to another.
I'm relucant to add semantics that would restrain on how rhashtable
works unless we have real and valid use-cases for it.
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
