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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.