svn commit: r304218 - head/sys/netinet

[Slawa Olhovchenkov]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 06:21:14AM -0700, Randall Stewart via svn-src-all wrote:

> 
> In theory it *could* be MFC’d to stable-10 and 11 but I am not sure we want to do that. I am
> told by Drew that it does improve performance since in stable-10 you are getting the INFO_WLOCK()
> but I am not sure if folks want it MFC’d…
> 
> One thing that this code leads us towards is we *in theory* could move the lock acquisition to the
> timer code itself (I think).. we would have to make sure that the callout functions did do the
> unlock since thats part of the lock-dance with reference… but its theoretically possible :-)

What reason to not MFC?
I mean MFCed all don't break API/ABI.