067a7cd06f
Alexey reported that we have GFP_KERNEL allocation when holding the spinlock tcf_lock. Actually we don't have to take that spinlock for all the cases, especially for the new one we just create. To modify the existing actions, we still need this spinlock to make sure the whole update is atomic. For net-next, we can get rid of this spinlock because we already hold the RTNL lock on slow path, and on fast path we can use RCU to protect the metalist. Joint work with Jamal. Reported-by: Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@ispras.ru> Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| acpi | ||
| asm-generic | ||
| clocksource | ||
| crypto | ||
| drm | ||
| dt-bindings | ||
| keys | ||
| kvm | ||
| linux | ||
| math-emu | ||
| media | ||
| memory | ||
| misc | ||
| net | ||
| pcmcia | ||
| ras | ||
| rdma | ||
| rxrpc | ||
| scsi | ||
| soc | ||
| sound | ||
| target | ||
| trace | ||
| uapi | ||
| video | ||
| xen | ||
| Kbuild | ||