Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+ipvs\-next\]\s+ipvs\:\s+Remove\s+rcu_read_unlock\(\)\;rcu_read_lock\(\)\;\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 09:02:56 +0300 (EEST)
Hello, Thanks for the note, I overlooked this parameter. Regards -- Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to ma
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00082.html (11,771 bytes)

2. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 02:59:26 +0200
Hi Julian, We seem to be supporting over that limit via module_param and sysfs: /sys/module/nf_conntrack/parameters/hashsize Regards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00076.html (11,210 bytes)

3. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 09:28:16 +0900
Sure, will do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-in
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00074.html (11,563 bytes)

4. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:46:55 +0300 (EEST)
Hello, Thanks, looks like a good idea to me, I guess its place is include/linux/sched.h. Simon, can you prepare 2 patches instead, one for cond_resched_rcu_lock and second for ipvs? Regards -- Julian
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00073.html (11,115 bytes)

5. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:04:03 -0700
I have objections. I would _add_ a cond_resched() there to explicitly do what we want Maybe a macro/inline doing this already exists. static void inline cond_resched_rcu_lock(void) { if (need_resched
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00071.html (10,428 bytes)

6. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:36:39 +0900
Ok, leaving it seems reasonable. Pablo, do you have any objections? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00069.html (11,513 bytes)

7. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Hans Schillstrom <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:05:26 +0200
My opinion is to keep it, people tends to do such "rare" things. It's not unusual with 256k - 1M rows... Regards Hans Attachment: smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00066.html (11,047 bytes)

8. Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:15:25 +0300 (EEST)
Hello, I thought it is a good idea for fixed hash table of IP_VS_TAB_BITS=20. May be if guarded by if (!((++idx) & 4095)) to reduce its rate to 256 (with idx++ removed from the for loop) ? Netfilter
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00065.html (11,554 bytes)

9. [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: Remove rcu_read_unlock();rcu_read_lock(); (score: 1)
Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:12:33 +0900
It is unclear to me that there is any utility in the following: rcu_read_unlock(); rcu_read_lock(); So this patch removes the two instances of the above from ip_vs_conn.c. This was introduced in 7cf2
/html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00062.html (10,039 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu