From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964921AbWDGU1b (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:27:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932456AbWDGU1b (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:27:31 -0400 Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:24787 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932455AbWDGU1a (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:27:30 -0400 Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:27:04 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Yi Yang Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton , Matt Helsley Subject: Re: [2.6.16 PATCH] Filessytem Events Reporter V2 Message-ID: <20060407202704.GA1406@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <4433C456.7010708@gmail.com> <20060407062428.GA31351@2ka.mipt.ru> <44361F39.4020501@gmail.com> <20060407094732.GA13235@2ka.mipt.ru> <443638D8.2010800@gmail.com> <20060407102602.GA27764@2ka.mipt.ru> <443681D3.8000805@gmail.com> <20060407194716.GA27652@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060407194716.GA27652@2ka.mipt.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.5 (2ka.mipt.ru [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 08 Apr 2006 00:27:05 +0400 (MSD) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 11:47:16PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov (johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru) wrote: > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 11:14:27PM +0800, Yi Yang (yang.y.yi@gmail.com) wrote: > > Evgeniy Polyakov ??????: > > >On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 06:03:04PM +0800, Yi Yang (yang.y.yi@gmail.com) > > >wrote: > > > > > >>>>Can you explain why there is such a big difference between > > >>>>netlink_unicast and netlink_broadcast? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>Netlink broadcast clones skbs, while unicasting requires the whole new > > >>>one. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>No, I also use clone to send skb, so they should have the same overhead. > > >> > > > > > >I missed that. > > >After rereading fsevent_send_to_process() I do not see how original skb > > >is freed though. > > > > > I'm considering how to free it, because cloned skbs share data with > > original skb, so this case is special, > > I try to clarify the logic of kfree_skb. > > Just call kfree_skb() after fsevent_send_to_process() or at the very > end of this function. If unicast delivering fails you also need to free cloned skb. For clarification: I mean if any error happens before netlink_unicast() call, you need to free skb. If netlink_unicast() is called, it will take care of skb in any case. > > > > > >>>>>Btw, you need some rebalancing of the per-cpu queues, probably in > > >>>>>keventd, since CPUs can go offline and your messages will stuck foreve > > >>>>>there. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>Does keventd not do it? if so, keventd should be modified. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>How does keventd know about your own structures? > > >>>You have an per-cpu object, but your keventd function gets object > > >>> > > >>>from running cpu, not from any other cpus. > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Evgeniy Polyakov -- Evgeniy Polyakov