Hi Andrei, On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Emeltchenko Andrei <Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 03:17:15PM -0200, Ulisses Furquim wrote: <snip> >> I was under the impression you'd remove RCU for conn->chan_l >> completely. You're adding a lock only in the updaters? If so, please >> take a look at commit 3d57dc680 which shows all changes from mutex to >> RCU. I don't think just adding a lock/unlock in l2cap_conn_start and >> l2cap_conn_del will be enough. l2cap_chan_add seems to be called from >> other contexts and it does a list_add_rcu(). Have you thought of that? > > I am adding lock to updaters and to the places we need to sleep and > rcu_read_lock cannot be used. This patch adds locks to updaters and > following patches cover other places. Maybe I need to split them better. It needs to be split better, yes. And if you're adding a mutex also in some readers of the list instead of using RCU I believe it'd be better to just use a mutex and remove RCU usage altogether. That will be possibly just a revert of 3d57dc6806, but you need to check that. Regards, -- Ulisses Furquim ProFUSION embedded systems http://profusion.mobi Mobile: +55 19 9250 0942 Skype: ulissesffs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
