On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:49:08AM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> Previously, before rhashtable, /proc assoc listing was done by
> read-locking the entire hash entry and dumping all assocs at once, so we
> were sure that the assoc wasn't freed because it wouldn't be possible to
> remove it from the hash
Previously, before rhashtable, /proc assoc listing was done by
read-locking the entire hash entry and dumping all assocs at once, so we
were sure that the assoc wasn't freed because it wouldn't be possible to
remove it from the hash meanwhile.
Now we use rhashtable to list transports, and dump
On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 17:37 -0200, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:27:36AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 01:49 +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > > Previously, before rhashtable, /proc assoc listing was done by
> > > read-locking the entire hash entry and
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:57:16AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 17:37 -0200, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:27:36AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 01:49 +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > > > Previously, before rhashtable, /proc
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:27:36AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 01:49 +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > Previously, before rhashtable, /proc assoc listing was done by
> > read-locking the entire hash entry and dumping all assocs at once, so we
> > were sure that the assoc wasn't
On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 01:49 +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> Previously, before rhashtable, /proc assoc listing was done by
> read-locking the entire hash entry and dumping all assocs at once, so we
> were sure that the assoc wasn't freed because it wouldn't be possible to
> remove it from the hash
