netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/3] iptables: lock free counters (alternate version)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4988B190.2060300@cosmosbay.com>
Date:	Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:05:20 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
CC:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] iptables: lock free counters (alternate version)

Stephen Hemminger a écrit :
>>
>> General/intuitive idea would be :
>>
>> switch pointers to a newly allocated table (and zeroed counters)
>> wait one RCU grace period
>> collect/sum all counters of "old" table + (all cpus) into user provided table
>> restore previous table
>> wait one RCU grace period
>> disable_bh()
>> collect/sum all counters of "new and temporary" table (all cpus) and
>> reinject them into local cpu table (this cpu should not be interrupted)
>> enable_bh()
>>
>> This way, "iptables -L" is not too expensive and doesnt block packet processing at all.
> 
> Pretty much what I said.


Cool then, sorry for misunderstanding your patch.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html