lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:10:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com> cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, dada1@...mosbay.com, kaber@...sh.net, jeff.chua.linux@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@...ba.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, jengelh@...ozas.de, r000n@...0n.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3) On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > The counters are the bigger problem, otherwise we could just free table > info via rcu. Do we really have to support: replace where the counter > values coming out to user space are always exactly accurate, or is it > allowed to replace a rule and maybe lose some counter ticks (worst case > NCPU-1). Why not just read the counters fromt he old one at RCU free time (they are guaranteed to be stable at that point, since we're all done with those entries), and apply them at that point to the current setup? Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists