David Miller wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 07:43:56 +0200 > >> Le lundi 03 mai 2010 à 07:41 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit : >> >>> Oops scratch that, I'll resend a correct version. >>> >>> >> Sorry, patch _is_ fine, I had one brain collapse when re-reading it, I >> thought a different mutex was in use in one of the functions. > > Ok, Patrick please review, thanks. Actually we don't need the rcu_dereference() calls at all since registration and unregistration are protected by the mutexes. I queued this patch in nf-next, the only reason why I haven't submitted it yet is that I was unable to get git to cleanly export only the proper set of patches meant for -next due to a few merges, it insists on including 5 patches already merged upstream. If you don't mind ignoring the first 5 patches in the series, I'll send a pull request tonight.