lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT] Networking
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:42:41PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le lundi 16 ao??t 2010 ?? 09:53 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> > Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Le dimanche 15 aou^t 2010 a` 12:55 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> > ...
> > > [PATCH] netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: avoid lockdep false positive
> > >
> > > After commit 24b36f019 (netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: dont block
> > > bottom half more than necessary), lockdep can raise a warning
> > > because we attempt to lock a spinlock with BH enabled, while
> > > the same lock is usually locked by another cpu in a softirq context.
> >
> > Btw, could you remind us how get_counters() are serialized (I guess
> > you can't have them on 2 cpus at the same time)?
> >
>
> get_counters() is serialized by the xt_find_table_lock() done from
> get_entries(). This use a mutex to guard against changes.
>
> You are right that if we ever allow two concurrent "iptables -nvL"
> operations in the future (using a read lock on a rwlock instead of a
> mutex), then we must disable BH even for summing data from the other
> cpus.

OK, thanks for the explanation,

Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-08-16 12:51    [W:0.223 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site