[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3)
    From: Stephen Hemminger <>
    Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:01:11 -0700

    > The counters are the bigger problem, otherwise we could just free table
    > info via rcu. Do we really have to support: replace where the counter
    > values coming out to user space are always exactly accurate, or is it
    > allowed to replace a rule and maybe lose some counter ticks (worst case
    > NCPU-1).

    I say this case doesn't matter until someone can prove that it's
    any different from the IPTABLES replace operation system call
    executing a few microseconds earlier or later.

    There really is no difference, and we're making complexity out of
    nothing just to ensure something which isn't actually guarenteed right

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-16 02:09    [W:0.018 / U:13.940 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site