Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] bridge: 64bit rx/tx counters

From: Andrew Morton <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 21:47:40 -0700

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:39:36 +0200 Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Note : should be applied after "net: Introduce 
> u64_stats_sync infrastructure", if accepted.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> [PATCH net-next-2.6] bridge: 64bit rx/tx counters
> 
> Use u64_stats_sync infrastructure to provide 64bit rx/tx 
> counters even on 32bit hosts.
> 
> It is safe to use a single u64_stats_sync for rx and tx,
> because BH is disabled on both, and we use per_cpu data.
>

Oh for fuck's sake.  Will you guys just stop adding generic kernel
infrastructure behind everyone's backs?

Had I actually been aware that this stuff was going into the tree I'd
have pointed out that the u64_stats_* api needs renaming. 
s/stats/counter/ because it has no business assuming that the counter
is being used for statistics.

And all this open-coded per-cpu counter stuff added all over the place.
Were percpu_counters tested or reviewed and found inadequate and unfixable?
If so, please do tell.