1. 15 6月, 2010 1 次提交
  2. 14 6月, 2010 4 次提交
  3. 10 6月, 2010 2 次提交
  4. 09 6月, 2010 4 次提交
  5. 08 6月, 2010 1 次提交
    • E
      netfilter: nf_conntrack: IPS_UNTRACKED bit · 5bfddbd4
      Eric Dumazet 提交于
      NOTRACK makes all cpus share a cache line on nf_conntrack_untracked
      twice per packet. This is bad for performance.
      __read_mostly annotation is also a bad choice.
      
      This patch introduces IPS_UNTRACKED bit so that we can use later a
      per_cpu untrack structure more easily.
      
      A new helper, nf_ct_untracked_get() returns a pointer to
      nf_conntrack_untracked.
      
      Another one, nf_ct_untracked_status_or() is used by nf_nat_init() to add
      IPS_NAT_DONE_MASK bits to untracked status.
      
      nf_ct_is_untracked() prototype is changed to work on a nf_conn pointer.
      Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NPatrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
      5bfddbd4
  6. 04 6月, 2010 1 次提交
  7. 01 6月, 2010 2 次提交
  8. 31 5月, 2010 8 次提交
  9. 29 5月, 2010 7 次提交
  10. 28 5月, 2010 6 次提交
  11. 27 5月, 2010 2 次提交
    • E
      net: fix lock_sock_bh/unlock_sock_bh · 8a74ad60
      Eric Dumazet 提交于
      This new sock lock primitive was introduced to speedup some user context
      socket manipulation. But it is unsafe to protect two threads, one using
      regular lock_sock/release_sock, one using lock_sock_bh/unlock_sock_bh
      
      This patch changes lock_sock_bh to be careful against 'owned' state.
      If owned is found to be set, we must take the slow path.
      lock_sock_bh() now returns a boolean to say if the slow path was taken,
      and this boolean is used at unlock_sock_bh time to call the appropriate
      unlock function.
      
      After this change, BH are either disabled or enabled during the
      lock_sock_bh/unlock_sock_bh protected section. This might be misleading,
      so we rename these functions to lock_sock_fast()/unlock_sock_fast().
      Reported-by: NAnton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
      Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NAnton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      8a74ad60
    • J
      net/iucv: Add missing spin_unlock · a56635a5
      Julia Lawall 提交于
      Add a spin_unlock missing on the error path.  There seems like no reason
      why the lock should continue to be held if the kzalloc fail.
      
      The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
      (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
      
      // <smpl>
      @@
      expression E1;
      @@
      
      * spin_lock(E1,...);
        <+... when != E1
        if (...) {
          ... when != E1
      *   return ...;
        }
        ...+>
      * spin_unlock(E1,...);
      // </smpl>
      Signed-off-by: NJulia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      a56635a5
  12. 26 5月, 2010 2 次提交