Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:48:21 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [patch] reducing arp locking Message-ID: <509B8DF5.5010101@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <509B88B1.3070905@FreeBSD.org> References: <509AEDAC.10002@FreeBSD.org> <509B884F.7040106@networx.ch> <509B88B1.3070905@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08.11.2012 11:25, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > On 08.11.2012 14:24, Andre Oppermann wrote: >> On 08.11.2012 00:24, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: >>> Hello list! >>> >>> Currently we need to acquire 2 read locks to perform simple 6-byte >>> copying from arp record to packet >>> ethernet header. >>> >>> It seems that acquiring lle lock for fast path (main traffic flow) is >>> not necessary even with >>> current code. >>> >>> My tests shows ~10% improvement with this patch applied. >>> >>> If nobody objects I plan to commit this change at the end of next week. >> >> This is risky and prone to race conditions. The copy of the MAC address >> should be done while the table read lock is held to protect against the > It is done exactly as you say: table read lock is held. Right. Sorry. I didn't immediately get that the IF_AFDATA_LOCK is the table lock. -- Andre >> entry going away. You can either return with table lock held and drop >> it after the copy, or you could a modified lookup function that takes a >> pointer for the copy destination, do the copy with the read lock, and then >> return. If no entry is found an error is returned and obviously no copy >> is done. >> > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?509B8DF5.5010101>