Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:26:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:26:13 -0500 Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]:33040 "EHLO smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:26:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 02:36:34 +0100 (CET) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: "David S. Miller" cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] (0/8) replace brlock with RCU In-Reply-To: <20030311.162831.42576307.davem@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <1047428032.15874.87.camel@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> <20030311.162831.42576307.davem@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 785 Lines: 25 Hi, On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > 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? BTW if anyone is interested in a brlock implementation, which can offer this property, but can also beat rcu, you might want to look at this patch http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104733360501112&w=2 bye, Roman - 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/