netdev - Re: [PATCH net-2.6] pkt_sched: gen

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]

Date:	Tue, 08 Jun 2010 07:39:22 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6] pkt_sched: gen_estimator: add a new lock

Le mardi 08 juin 2010 à 13:20 +0800, Changli Gao a écrit :

> IMO, this bug should be fixed by adding rtnl_lock to xt_RATEEST.c.
> Killing rtnl should be done in separated patches. They are different
> things. Your patch introduces another locks, and it is extra overhead
> for other users.
> 

extra overhead, in new/kill estimators ? 

Are you kidding ?

RTNL is taken, taking an extra-uncontended spinlock is free.

Nope, I wont add rtnl lock to xt_RATEEST.c

I believe you dont really understood what I patiently explained to you.

Thats becoming rediculous.



--
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