netdev - Re: Regression: [PATCH] mlx4: give precise rx/tx bytes/packets counters

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: <1480612130.18162.321.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Thu, 01 Dec 2016 09:08:50 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc:     Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: Regression: [PATCH] mlx4: give precise rx/tx bytes/packets
 counters

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 18:33 +0200, Saeed Mahameed wrote:

> Thanks for the detailed answer !!

You're welcome.

> 
> BTW you went 5 steps ahead of my original question :)), so far you
> already have a patch without locking at all (really impressive).
> 
> What i wanted to ask originally, was regarding the "_bh", i didn't
> mean to completely remove the "spin_lock_bh",
> I meant, what happens if we replace "spin_lock_bh"  with "spin_lock",
> without disabling bh ?
> I gues raw "sping_lock" handles points (2 to 4) from above, but it
> won't handle long irqs.

Thats a very good point, the _bh prefix can totally be removed, since
stats_lock is only acquired from process context.