netdev - Re: [rfc 10/13] [RFC 10/13] IPVS: management of persistence engine modules

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:	Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:29:20 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Cc:	lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Wensong Zhang <wensong@...ux-vs.org>,
	Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [rfc 10/13] [RFC 10/13] IPVS: management of persistence engine
 modules

On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:48:05 +0900
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au> wrote:

> +/* lock for service table */
> +static DEFINE_RWLOCK(__ip_vs_pe_lock);

It is already static so why the __?
Reader/writer locks are slower than spinlocks.  Either use
a spinlock, or RCU (if possible)

> +/* Bind a service with a pe */
> +void ip_vs_bind_pe(struct ip_vs_service *svc, struct ip_vs_pe *pe)
> +{
> +	svc->pe = pe;
> +}
> +
> +/* Unbind a service from its pe */
> +void ip_vs_unbind_pe(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> +{
> +	svc->pe = NULL;
> +}

What does having these wrappers buy?
--
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