List Info

Thread: nfnetlink_log: shorten instances_lock holding time




nfnetlink_log: shorten instances_lock holding time
user name
2007-02-11 18:40:12
Shorten instances_lock window at the cost of doing
unnecessary work
on the failure case. I don't know if it makes sense
actually. ;>

Signed-off-by: Micha³ Miros³aw <mirq-linuxrere.qmqm.pl>

--- linux-2.6.20/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_log.c.6	2007-02-11
22:31:19.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_log.c	2007-02-11
22:41:18.000000000 +0100
 -149,18
+149,14  instance_create(u_int16_t group_num, int
 
 	if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE)) {
 		UDEBUG("aborting, could not reference own module
(module unloading?)n");
-		goto out_modunload;
-	}
-
-	write_lock_bh(&instances_lock);	
-	if (__instance_lookup(group_num)) {
-		UDEBUG("aborting, instance already existsn");
-		goto out_unlock;
+		return NULL;
 	}
 
 	inst = kzalloc(sizeof(*inst), GFP_ATOMIC);
-	if (!inst)
-		goto out_unlock;
+	if (!inst) {
+		module_put(THIS_MODULE);
+		return NULL;
+	}
 
 	INIT_HLIST_NODE(&inst->hlist);
 	spin_lock_init(&inst->lock);
 -181,21
+177,25  instance_create(u_int16_t group_num, int
 	inst->copy_mode 	= NFULNL_COPY_PACKET;
 	inst->copy_range 	= 0xffff;
 
-	hlist_add_head(&inst->hlist, 
+	write_lock_bh(&instances_lock);	
+
+	if (!__instance_lookup(group_num)) {
+		hlist_add_head(&inst->hlist, 
 		       &instance_table[instance_hashfn(group_num)]);
 
-	UDEBUG("newly added node: %p, next=%pn",
&inst->hlist, 
-		inst->hlist.next);
+		UDEBUG("newly added node: %p, next=%pn",
&inst->hlist, 
+			inst->hlist.next);
+	} else {
+		UDEBUG("aborting, instance already existsn");
+
+		kfree(inst);
+		module_put(THIS_MODULE);
+		inst = NULL;
+	}
 
 	write_unlock_bh(&instances_lock);
 
 	return inst;
-
-out_unlock:
-	write_unlock_bh(&instances_lock);
-	module_put(THIS_MODULE);
-out_modunload:
-	return NULL;
 }
 
 static int __nfulnl_send(struct nfulnl_instance *inst);


Re: nfnetlink_log: shorten instances_lock holding time
country flaguser name
Germany
2007-02-13 06:48:31
Micha³ Miros³aw wrote:
> Shorten instances_lock window at the cost of doing
unnecessary work
> on the failure case. I don't know if it makes sense
actually. ;>

Not really. Its taking the lock whats expensive and we
shouldn't
have contention here.



[1-2]

about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )