Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 2/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1b: generate Responder Cookie secret

From: Andi Kleen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:47:17 +0100

David Miller <[email-masked]> writes:

> From: William Allen Simpson <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:23:21 -0500
>
>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_secret_locker);
>
> So connection creation scalability will be limited now because
> we'll always have to go through this centralized spinlock even
> for independent listening sockets, right?

I was about to complain about the same thing in a earlier version
of this patch kit, but then I noticed the spin lock aquiring 
is guarded by

if (unlikely(time_after_eq(jiffy, tcp_secret_generating->expires))) {

which presumably makes it rare enough?

-Andi

-- 
[email-masked] -- Speaking for myself only.