netdev
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: take 2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events

from [jamal] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: take 2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 03 Apr 2005 12:36:35 -0400
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <42501027.6010609@xxxxxxxxx>
Organization: jamalopolous
References: <1112319441.1089.83.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050401042106.GA27762@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112353398.1096.116.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050401114258.GA2932@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112358278.1096.160.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050401123554.GA3468@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112403845.1088.14.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050402012813.GA24575@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112406164.1088.54.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050402014619.GB24861@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112469601.1088.173.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1112538718.1096.394.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42501027.6010609@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx 
Masahide,

Attached is incremental patch on top of the one posted earlier.
Looks ok from my basic testing. Please run it against your tests
and see if it stands.

cheers,
jamal

On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 11:47, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> You call these functions from both softirq- and user-context, so you
> need to protect against BHs.
> 
> Regards
> Patrick
>

Attachment: ipsec-event-take2-1-1
Description: Text document

[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: take 2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events, jamal
Next by Date:  Re: [IPSEC]: Kill nested read lock by deleting xfrm_init_tempsel, Patrick McHardy
Previous by Thread:  Re: take 2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events, jamal
Next by Thread:  Re: take 2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events, Herbert Xu
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]