[ovs-dev] [PATCH] ofproto-dpif-xlate: Implement RCU locking in ofproto-dpif-xlate.

[Ryan Wilson]

> Is this still up-to-date?  I know that we've had a lot of discussion and
> a couple of patch versions related to netdevs this week.

Yup, this is still up-to-date. I've looked over the netdev code committed in the last week and did a sanity test to make sure everything still works. 


>  have to say that I don't understand the previous paragraph of the
> commit message.  Maybe you could spell it out more precisely?  Also, the
> netdev portion of the commit seems to have little to do with the rest,
> so I'd be inclined to make it a separate preparatory commit.


After re-reading my commit, I totally agree. I'll resubmit the patch split into 2 with a more clear description.

Ryan Wilson
Member of Technical Staff
wryan at vmware.com
3401 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, CA
650.427.1511 Office
916.588.7783 Mobile

On May 9, 2014, at 9:59 AM, Alex Wang <alexw at nicira.com> wrote:

> Hey Ben,
> 
> I think this one is up-to-date.  I'm reviewing it.
> 
> Your comments make sense.  I think Ryan will adjust it.
> 
> Also, I'd also like you or Ethan to review it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alex Wang,
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
> Is this still up-to-date?  I know that we've had a lot of discussion and
> a couple of patch versions related to netdevs this week.
> 
> More below.
> 
> On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:54:12AM -0700, Ryan Wilson wrote:
> > Before, a global read-write lock protected the ofproto-dpif / ofproto-dpif-xlate
> > interface. Handler and revalidator threads had to wait while configuration was
> > being changed. This patch implements RCU locking which allows handlers and
> > revalidators to operate while configuration is being updated.
> >
> > This patch also frees netdev with ovsrcu_postpone. This is because if RCU
> > reader threads take a ref to the netdev, the netdev cannot be deleted and
> > re-created with different types.
> 
> I have to say that I don't understand the previous paragraph of the
> commit message.  Maybe you could spell it out more precisely?  Also, the
> netdev portion of the commit seems to have little to do with the rest,
> so I'd be inclined to make it a separate preparatory commit.
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/attachments/20140509/8a2ae107/attachment-0005.html>