On 16-09-07 09:23 AM, John Fastabend wrote: > On 16-09-01 10:57 PM, Cong Wang wrote: >> Currently there are only two tc actions lockless: >> gact and mirred. But they are questionable because >> we don't have anything to prevent a parallel update >> on an existing tc action in hash table while reading >> it on fast path, this could be a problem when a tc >> action becomes complex. > > hmm I'm trying to see where the questionable part is in the current > code? What is it exactly.
[...] > What did I miss? > OK tracked this down see the other patch 5/6.
