[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160111.163543.869963270978192882.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:35:43 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: mleitner@...hat.com
Cc: vyasevich@...il.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
lucien.xin@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, vyasevic@...hat.com,
daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] sctp: add the rhashtable apis for sctp
global transport hashtable
From: mleitner@...hat.com
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:09:27 -0200
> There is still the other part of this thread to be worked on (re
> ->dead), maybe that will justify extra stuff in here but I really
> wouldn't like to add extra structures and locks on this just to satisfy
> an unreasonable scenario like this. This hash is very busy, the lean it
> is, the better.
It is never "unreasonable" if it is necessary to fix a real bug, which
this is.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists