From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10AF0C46475 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 16:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC46207DD for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 16:38:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BFC46207DD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728538AbeJXBCf (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 21:02:35 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42626 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727402AbeJXBCf (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 21:02:35 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623C4AD8E; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 16:38:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by unicorn.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FF4CE0093; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 18:38:25 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 18:38:25 +0200 From: Michal Kubecek To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Mahesh Bandewar =?utf-8?B?KOCkruCkueClh+CktiDgpKzgpILgpKHgpYfgpLXgpL4=?= =?utf-8?B?4KSwKQ==?= , mk.singh@oracle.com, linux-netdev , Jay Vosburgh , Veaceslav Falico , Andy Gospodarek , "David S. Miller" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding:avoid repeated display of same link status change Message-ID: <20181023163825.GB22291@unicorn.suse.cz> References: <20181023152924.24033-1-mk.singh@oracle.com> <65f98009-1ce0-d6fd-06dc-233aa115abc9@gmail.com> <20181023162613.GA22291@unicorn.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20181023162613.GA22291@unicorn.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 06:26:14PM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 09:10:44AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > > > On 10/23/2018 08:54 AM, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote: > > > > > Atomic operations are expensive (on certain architectures) and miimon > > > runs quite frequently. Is the added cost of these atomic operations > > > even worth just to avoid *duplicate info* messages? This seems like a > > > overkill! > > > > atomic_read() is a simple read, no atomic operation involved. > > > > Same remark for atomic_set() > > Which makes me wonder if the patch really needs atomic_t. IMHO it does not. AFAICS multiple instances of bond_mii_monitor() cannot run simultaneously for the same bond so that there doesn't seem to be anything to collide with. (And if they could, we would need to test and set the flag atomically in bond_miimon_inspect().) Michal Kubecek