[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAN8Q1Ecq9T5HC60_ta8Xr9kKyAe8Fjrd8znV9MpDTYqkSSptOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 15:30:42 -0700
From: Peter LaDow <petela@...ougs.wsu.edu>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Carsten Emde <C.Emde@...dl.org>, John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 3/4] net: netfilter: Serialize xt_write_recseq sections
on RT
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> Cough. You are missing a boat load of crucial fixes. There is a damned
> good reason why 3.0.stable got 12 updates and the -rt version 14.
I don't doubt there are. But we've only experienced one problem
between 3.0.36-rt58 and 3.0.48-rt72. Indeed, it might be easier to
evaluate the risk if all the changelogs were readily available. So
far, however, we haven't discovered any other issues that give us any
concerns.
> Your risk assessment is definitley interesting.
We have specifically tested 3.0.36-rt58 for performance in our
application. Moving to 3.0.48-rt72 poses risk about whether would
still be able to meet our performance requirements. And with regard
to stability, the only issue we've had since our earlier moved to
3.0.36-rt58 was the netfilter problem. We initially only saw the
problem on PPP related interfaces, so we reverted to 3.0.3 (non-rt)
for PPP related issues.
Now, if you think there are some issues that should raise eyebrows, or
can point me to a list of changelogs, I'd be happy to evaluate them.
Thanks,
Pete
--
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