[ovs-dev] [PATCH v3] dpif-netdev: Remove PMD latency on seq_mutex
Flavio Leitner
fbl at redhat.com
Tue Jul 5 19:04:04 UTC 2016
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 03:48:30AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
> > On Jun 29, 2016, at 4:58 PM, Flavio Leitner <fbl at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 05:04:06AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Jun 23, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Flavio Leitner <fbl at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> ...
> >
> >>> +
> >>> + ovs_assert(!single_threaded());
> >>> + perthread = ovsrcu_perthread_get();
> >>
> >> Is there a particular reason not to do also these only when the locking succeeds? E.g.,
> >
> > The reason was to not hold the lock more than needed even
> > though the above lines should be fast enough today. Are you
> > saying that the code looks significantly better if we try
> > locking first at the beginning?
>
> I guess in addition to aesthetics my thinking was not to do
> unnecessary things if the locking does not succeed, but your design
> argument is better, especially when we expect the locking to succeed
> most of the time.
I sent the v4 with the return code fixed:
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-July/074505.html
Thanks for your review!
fbl
More information about the dev
mailing list