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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 17:05:04 +0200 From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Netfilter Development Mailinglist <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] netfilter: get rid of atomic ops in fast path On 03.04.2011 15:15, Eric Dumazet wrote: > We currently use a percpu spinlock to 'protect' rule bytes/packets > counters, after various attempts to use RCU instead. > > Lately we added a seqlock so that get_counters() can run without > blocking BH or 'writers'. But we really only need the seqcount in it. > > Spinlock itself is only locked by the current/owner cpu, so we can > remove it completely. > > This cleanups api, using correct 'writer' vs 'reader' semantic. > > At replace time, the get_counters() call makes sure all cpus are done > using the old table. Applied, thanks Eric. -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists