On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 10:01:27PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022, Jiri Wiesner wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 08:41:52PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > >
> > > +static void est_reload_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
> > > +{
> > > + struct netns_ipvs *ipvs =
> > > + container_of(work, struct netns_ipvs, est_reload_work.work);
> > > + int genid = atomic_read(&ipvs->est_genid);
> > > + int genid_done = atomic_read(&ipvs->est_genid_done);
> > > + unsigned long delay = HZ / 10; /* repeat startups after failure */
> > > + bool repeat = false;
> > > + int id;
> > > +
> > > + mutex_lock(&ipvs->est_mutex);
> > > + for (id = 0; id < ipvs->est_kt_count; id++) {
> > > + struct ip_vs_est_kt_data *kd = ipvs->est_kt_arr[id];
> > > +
> > > + /* netns clean up started, abort delayed work */
> > > + if (!ipvs->enable)
> > > + goto unlock;
> >
> > It would save some code to move the ipvs->enable check before the critical section and use a return statement right away.
>
> I preferred to react to cleanup_net() faster and
> avoid creating threads if this is what we try to do here.
I meant putting
if (!ipvs->enable)
return;
right before the mutex_lock() statement.
--
Jiri Wiesner
SUSE Labs
