Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance

On Thursday 22 September 2005 14:58, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> Umm, no - adding set_fs/get_fs mess for things like that is not right.

I think it's fine. We're using it for various other interfaces too. In fact
sys_set_mempolicy is already used elsewhere in the kernel too.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Adds sys_set_mempolicy() in include/linux/syscalls.h
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: SATA suspend-to-ram patch - merge?
• Next by Date: [PATCH] repair nfsd/sunrpc in 2.6.14-rc2-mm1 (and other -mm versions)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]