On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:59:19AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:24:26AM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > I see, we have no more lockless API for IDA anymore :-(. In our case, > > we were already protected by the the nfnl_lock mutex, which it was > > sufficient to ensure non-concurrent access to IDA structures. > > You're actually the first user for whom this is true. For every other > user, the requirement to manage their own spinlock was a pain. > > > Unless I'm missing anything, the new API forces use to the spinlock > > call with disabled irq for each time we update something from the > > netfilter netlink interface, so that's a no-go for us. > > I can't believe that's a serious problem for you, though. You're calling > sscanf(), this can't possibly be a performance path. It's not about performance, this is control plane code. This is disabling irqs, which is something we don't need. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
