| To: | Jay Vosburgh <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: bonding might sleep with lock held |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 13 May 2004 21:04:45 +0200 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200405131844.i4DIijD3018359@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> |
| References: | <20040513082053.GC27682@wotan.suse.de> <200405131844.i4DIijD3018359@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 13 May 2004 11:44:45 -0700 Jay Vosburgh <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It will race against the timers, although I don't see anything > in there offhand that would conflict. It just feels somehow unclean to > do it without the lock. Why should the timers care if there can be a packet received from the network or not? (this is all what dev_remove_pack prevents) -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: PATCH: bonding might sleep with lock held, Jay Vosburgh |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: MSEC_TO_JIFFIES is messed up..., Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: PATCH: bonding might sleep with lock held, Jay Vosburgh |
| Next by Thread: | Re: PATCH: bonding might sleep with lock held, Jay Vosburgh |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |