Le dimanche 20 mars 2011 Ã 15:41 +0100, Patrick McHardy a Ãcrit : > Am 18.03.2011 18:07, schrieb Eric Dumazet: > > We currently use a percpu spinlock to 'protect' rule bytes/packets > > counters, after various attempts to use RCU instead. > > > > Lately we added a seqlock so that get_counters() can run without > > blocking BH or 'writers'. But we really use the seqcount in it. > > > > Spinlock itself is only locked by the current/owner cpu, so we can > > remove it completely. > > > > This cleanups api, using correct 'writer' vs 'reader' semantic. > > > > At replace time, the get_counters() call makes sure all cpus are done > > using the old table. > > I think this will have to wait until net-next opens up again since > its not a bugfix. Sure :) -- 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
