Since spin_unlock_wait() is defined as equivalent to spin_lock();
spin_unlock(), the memory barrier before spin_unlock_wait() is
also not required.
Not for stable!
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c | 8 +-------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
index 7a3b5e6..0591a25 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
@@ -139,13 +139,7 @@ static void nf_conntrack_all_lock(void)
spin_lock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock);
- /*
- * Order the store of 'nf_conntrack_locks_all' against
- * the spin_unlock_wait() loads below, such that if
- * nf_conntrack_lock() observes 'nf_conntrack_locks_all'
- * we must observe nf_conntrack_locks[] held:
- */
- smp_store_mb(nf_conntrack_locks_all, true);
+ nf_conntrack_locks_all = true;
for (i = 0; i < CONNTRACK_LOCKS; i++) {
spin_unlock_wait(&nf_conntrack_locks[i]);
--
2.7.4
--
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
