| To: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.2: export ethtool interface |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 1 Oct 2000 22:01:25 +0200 |
| Cc: | Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, Dave Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200010011533.TAA09585@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 05:39:21PM +0200 |
| References: | <39C9F123.D8FA4F68@xxxxxxxxxx> <200010011533.TAA09585@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 05:39:21PM +0200, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hello! > > > Yes. On 2.4 (at least) there is nothing to prevent the driver's ioctl() > > function from running on two or more CPUs simultaneously. > > I apologize, the reply is late a bit. > > However, I have to remind that open/close/ioctl __are__ serialized > with global semaphore. > > To Andi: BKL is fully useless here, just because these calls are allowed > to sleep. Of course it can sleep, in this case they have to lock themselves. With the BKL it would at least not be worse than in 2.2. [overall I think drivers/net/* is full of holes there, and 2.4 just made it much worse] -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch] tcp_tw in 2.4, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.2: export ethtool interface, Jeff Garzik |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.2: export ethtool interface, kuznet |
| Next by Thread: | Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.2: export ethtool interface, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |