ipv6: replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6_table
With all the preparation work before, we are now ready to replace rwlock with rcu and spinlock in fib6_table. That means now all fib6_node in fib6_table are protected by rcu. And when freeing fib6_node, call_rcu() is used to wait for the rcu grace period before releasing the memory. When accessing fib6_node, corresponding rcu APIs need to be used. And all previous sessions protected by the write lock will now be protected by the spin lock per table. All previous sessions protected by read lock will now be protected by rcu_read_lock(). A couple of things to note here: 1. As part of the work of replacing rwlock with rcu, the linked list of fn->leaf now has to be rcu protected as well. So both fn->leaf and rt->dst.rt6_next are now __rcu tagged and corresponding rcu APIs are used when manipulating them. 2. For fn->rr_ptr, first of all, it also needs to be rcu protected now and is tagged with __rcu and rcu APIs are used in corresponding places. Secondly, fn->rr_ptr is changed in rt6_select() which is a reader thread. This makes the issue a bit complicated. We think a valid solution for it is to let rt6_select() grab the tb6_lock if it decides to change it. As it is not in the normal operation and only happens when there is no valid neighbor cache for the route, we think the performance impact should be low. 3. fib6_walk_continue() has to be called with tb6_lock held even in the route dumping related functions, e.g. inet6_dump_fib(), fib6_tables_dump() and ipv6_route_seq_ops. It is because fib6_walk_continue() makes modifications to the walker structure, and so are fib6_repair_tree() and fib6_del_route(). In order to do proper syncing between them, we need to let fib6_walk_continue() hold the lock. We may be able to do further improvement on the way we do the tree walk to get rid of the need for holding the spin lock. But not for now. 4. When fib6_del_route() removes a route from the tree, we no longer mark rt->dst.rt6_next to NULL to make simultaneous reader be able to further traverse the list with rcu. However, rt->dst.rt6_next is only valid within this same rcu period. No one should access it later. 5. All the operation of atomic_inc(rt->rt6i_ref) is changed to be performed before we publish this route (either by linking it to fn->leaf or insert it in the list pointed by fn->leaf) just to be safe because as soon as we publish the route, some read thread will be able to access it. Signed-off-by: NWei Wang <weiwan@google.com> Signed-off-by: NMartin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Showing
此差异已折叠。
想要评论请 注册 或 登录