On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:55:38 +0100
Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> > Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> >> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>
> >>> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct ip_ct_tcp_state {
> >>>
> >>> struct ip_ct_tcp
> >>> {
> >>> + spinlock_t lock;
> >>> struct ip_ct_tcp_state seen[2]; /* connection parameters per
> >>> direction */
> >>> u_int8_t state; /* state of the connection (enum
> >>> tcp_conntrack) */
> >>> /* For detecting stale connections */
> >> Eric already posted a patch to use an array of locks, which is
> >> a better approach IMO since it keeps the size of the conntrack
> >> entries down.
> >
> > Yes, we probably can use an array for short lived lock sections.
I am not a fan of the array of locks. Sizing it is awkward and
it is vulnerable to hash collisions. Let's see if there is another
better way.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
