netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH]snmp6 64-bit counter support in proc.c

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]snmp6 64-bit counter support in proc.c
From: Shirley Ma <xma@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:09:15 -0800
Cc: Krishna Kumar <kumarkr@xxxxxxxxxx>, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mashirle@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Importance: Normal
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sensitivity:

> Perhaps there are some better ideas?

Yes. Dave, could we create a new interface to avoid the spin_lock?

Example 1:
modify write_seqlock(set_lock *s) to write_seqlock(seq_lock *s, int lock), it will modify all calling routines.

Example 2:
write a new interface write_seqlock_percpu(), which gets rid of the spin_lock, we can call by a different name, since there is no lock.

Thanks
Shirley Ma
IBM Linux Technology Center
15300 SW Koll Parkway
Beaverton, OR 97006-6063
Phone: (503) 578-7638
FAX: (503) 578-3228

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>