Re: [PATCH RFC] IPv6: Avoid taking write lock for/proc/net/ipv6_route
From: David Miller
Date: Fri Dec 30 2011 - 17:12:13 EST
From: Josh Hunt <joshhunt00@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 17:23:07 -0600
> lock_stat shows taking the write lock is causing the slowdown. Using
> this info I decided to write a version of fib6_clean_all() which
> replaces write_lock_bh(&table->tb6_lock) with
> read_lock_bh(&table->tb6_lock). With this new function I see the same
> results as with my rtnetlink iperf test. I guess my question is what
> am I missing? Is there a reason you need to take the write lock when
> reading the route table to display to proc?
You're not missing anything, it's just an oversight or laziness. :-)
I've applied your patch thanks.
Longer term we should make the ipv6 tree traversals RCU safe just
like net/ipv4/fib_trie.c is. Then we can do away with even the
read locks for read-only traversals.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/