Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752565Ab0HPKmt (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2010 06:42:49 -0400 Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:47060 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751516Ab0HPKmq (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2010 06:42:46 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=noifD7MZ+pcck0vohphwsrcyQhRDnj4qHcyeIm6EX6C7kxoykvAJdo+CEF193bI3pg OX9F79HAvWJ698+0hMpmZlTzsDTrtaoKTvTHQnKUQPd5RWBWp72ltphqLhj4736pKKcl AMTUUuiEVlgLn3TAo+tD2bjAH3eKZqbi+S4Xo= Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking From: Eric Dumazet To: Jarek Poplawski Cc: David Miller , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Patrick McHardy In-Reply-To: <20100816095325.GA8547@ff.dom.local> References: <20100816095325.GA8547@ff.dom.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:42:41 +0200 Message-ID: <1281955361.2524.35.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1237 Lines: 31 Le lundi 16 août 2010 à 09:53 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit : > Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Le dimanche 15 aou^t 2010 a` 12:55 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit : > ... > > [PATCH] netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: avoid lockdep false positive > > > > After commit 24b36f019 (netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: dont block > > bottom half more than necessary), lockdep can raise a warning > > because we attempt to lock a spinlock with BH enabled, while > > the same lock is usually locked by another cpu in a softirq context. > > Btw, could you remind us how get_counters() are serialized (I guess > you can't have them on 2 cpus at the same time)? > get_counters() is serialized by the xt_find_table_lock() done from get_entries(). This use a mutex to guard against changes. You are right that if we ever allow two concurrent "iptables -nvL" operations in the future (using a read lock on a rwlock instead of a mutex), then we must disable BH even for summing data from the other cpus. Thanks -- 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/