| To: | srompf@xxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49 |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 26 Nov 2002 02:15:46 -0800 (PST) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3DE33D6D.25B9C9B4@xxxxxx> |
| References: | <3DE33D6D.25B9C9B4@xxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
This locking below achieves nothing. + read_lock_irqsave(&dev->operstate_lock, flags); + state = dev->operstate; + read_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->operstate_lock, flags); In fact, the other side, locking when setting this value, can be done with a simple spinlock. Probably something else in the device struct can be reused. I also don't think this should be conditional, either we want it or we don't. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | pktgen update for testers, Robert Olsson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49, Stefan Rompf |
| Previous by Thread: | Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49, Stefan Rompf |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49, Stefan Rompf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |