Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1456269

Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate

From zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate
Date 2016-08-04 11:40 +0200
Message-ID <s2nia-73p-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <s2l6F-5K2-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <s2lT4-6gd-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <s2mcp-6oY-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


 Sure.
Is it better to add
#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU ?

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please do not top post
>
> On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 16:08 +0800, zhuyj wrote:
>>  +void register_checmate_prog_ops(void);
>> maybe it is extern void register_checmate_prog_ops(void);?
>>
>> +       preempt_disable();
>> +       rcu_read_lock();
>> IMHO, it is not necessary to use the above 2 since rcu_read_lock will
>> call preempt_disable.
>
> You might double check if this claim is true if CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y
>
>
>

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me> - 2016-08-04 09:20 +0200
  Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 10:10 +0200
    Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 10:30 +0200
      Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 11:40 +0200
        Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me> - 2016-08-05 09:20 +0200
          Re: [RFC 2/4] bpf, security: Add Checmate zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 09:50 +0200

csiph-web