[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904271602390.22156@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
kaber@...sh.net, jeff.chua.linux@...il.com, 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 r**ursive lock {XV}
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> BTW: THIS IS TOTALLY UNTESTED.
Gaah. I should have read through it one more time before sending.
> static inline void xt_info_rdunlock_bh(void)
> {
> struct xt_info_lock *lock;
>
> lock = &__get_cpu_var(xt_info_locks);
> if (!--lock->readers)
> spin_unlock(&lock->lock);
> }
This one was missing the "local_bh_enable()" at the end.
There may be other bugs, but that's the one I noticed immediately when
reading what I sent out. Oops.
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