[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b6a2187b0904161715s46412569t4aa9b255427f9626@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:15:44 +0800
From: Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
kaber@...sh.net, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
dada1@...mosbay.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: per-cpu spin-lock with recursion (v0.8)
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Stephen Hemminger
<shemminger@...tta.com> wrote:
> This version of x_tables (ip/ip6/arp) locking uses a per-cpu
> recursive lock that can be nested. It is sort of like existing kernel_lock,
> rwlock_t and even old 2.4 brlock.
Tested and working. As fast as before.
Thanks,
Jeff.
--
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