Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
Patrick McHardy wrote:
Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
wrt. the event cache, the missed field can save us from doing the
locking in every event caching at the cost of consuming a bit more of
memory. I think this is more conservative but safer than my approach (no
potential defering by calling cmpxchg forever, even if it's unlikely).
Still, we would need to take the spin lock for the event delivery. Let
me know what you think.
Would we really have to? The events are incremental anyways, so
it shouldn't matter if we very rarely deliver an event twice.
No problem. I'll add a comment to tell about this, we can re-visit this
issue later if it becomes a problem.
Agreed on the comment - I have to insist though that this can't cause
problems based on the duplicate delivery if userspace is using the
API correctly :) We can already have partial deliveries, so userspace
needs to incrementally accumulate the information in any case.
Please, let me know once you are done with your patch to rebase mine ;).
I'm done.
--
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
