From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: torvalds@transmeta.com
Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, rml@tech9.net, zwane@linuxpower.ca,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] (0/8) replace brlock with RCU
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:28:31 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030311.162831.42576307.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303111622260.2709-100000@home.transmeta.com>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:23:24 -0800 (PST)
On 11 Mar 2003, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>
> The following sequence of patches replaces the remaining use of brlock
> with RCU. Most of this is fairly straightforward. The unregister functions
> use synchronize_kernel(), perhaps there should be a special version to
> indicate sychronizing with network BH.
>
> Comments?
I'm not going to take this directly, but if it passes muster with David,
I'm happy. The fewer locking primitives we need, the better, and brlocks
have had enough problems that I wouldn't mind getting rid of them.
I'm fine with it, as long as I get shown how to get the equivalent
atomic sequence using the new primitives. Ie. is there still a way
to go:
stop_all_incoming_packets();
do_something();
resume_all_incoming_packets();
with the new stuff?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-12 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-09 23:44 [PATCH] small fixes in brlock.h Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-03-10 0:00 ` Robert Love
2003-03-10 0:03 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-03-10 0:10 ` Robert Love
2003-03-10 1:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-03-10 0:15 ` Robert Love
2003-03-10 2:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-03-10 21:54 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-12 0:13 ` [PATCH] (0/8) replace brlock with RCU Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-03-12 0:28 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2003-03-12 1:36 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-12 0:14 ` [PATCH] (1/8) Eliminate brlock in psnap Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 1:03 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-12 1:13 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-03-12 0:14 ` [PATCH] (2/8) Eliminate brlock for packet_type Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:20 ` David S. Miller
2003-03-12 0:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:14 ` [PATCH] (3/8) Eliminate brlock from vlan Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:14 ` [PATCH] (4/8) Eliminate brlock in net/bridge Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:14 ` [PATCH] (5/8) Eliminate brlock from netfilter Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 1:25 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-03-12 0:15 ` [PATCH] (6/8) Eliminate brlock from ipv4 Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:15 ` [PATCH] (7/8) Eliminate brlock from IPV6 Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:15 ` [PATCH] (8/8) Kill brlock Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:23 ` David S. Miller
2003-03-12 0:31 ` Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 0:34 ` David S. Miller
2003-03-12 0:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-03-12 0:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2003-03-12 2:31 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030311.162831.42576307.davem@redhat.com \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-net@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=zwane@linuxpower.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®