[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1380775982.19002.145.camel@edumazet-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 21:53:02 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] fix unsafe set_memory_rw from softirq
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:44 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> I think ifdef config_x86 is a bit ugly inside struct sk_filter, but
> don't mind whichever way.
Its not fair to make sk_filter bigger, because it means that simple (non
JIT) filter might need an extra cache line.
You could presumably use the following layout instead :
struct sk_filter
{
atomic_t refcnt;
struct rcu_head rcu;
struct work_struct work;
unsigned int len ____cacheline_aligned; /* Number of filter blocks */
unsigned int (*bpf_func)(const struct sk_buff *skb,
const struct sock_filter *filter);
struct sock_filter insns[0];
};
--
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