From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932465AbVHRVdo (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:33:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932468AbVHRVdo (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:33:44 -0400 Received: from dsl027-180-204.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.204]:52122 "EHLO outer-richmond.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932465AbVHRVdn (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:33:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 14:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20050818.143248.58283961.davem@davemloft.net> To: cw@f00f.org Cc: Sebastian.Classen@freenet-ag.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: overflows in /proc/net/dev From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20050818163358.GA19554@taniwha.stupidest.org> References: <1124350090.29902.8.camel@basti79.freenet-ag.de> <20050818163358.GA19554@taniwha.stupidest.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Chris Wedgwood Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:33:58 -0700 > I thought the concensurs here was that because doing reliable atomic > updates of 64-bit values isn't possible on some (most?) 32-bit > architectures so we need additional locking to make this work which is > undesirable? (It might even be a FAQ by now as this comes up fairly > often). That's correct.