| To: | jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 4/7] netpoll: fix ->poll() locking |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:59:58 -0700 |
| Cc: | mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <17001.33427.462497.856777@segfault.boston.redhat.com> |
| References: | <4.454130102@selenic.com> <5.454130102@selenic.com> <17001.31150.194263.732284@segfault.boston.redhat.com> <20050422155218.223fa84d.davem@davemloft.net> <17001.33427.462497.856777@segfault.boston.redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:02:43 -0400 Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Oh yes, of course. Somehow I managed to forget that we now squirrel away > the struct netpoll pointer in the net_device. Previously you could > register multiple netpoll clients to one device, and this was useful for > say doing netconsole and netdump over the same interface. If we've removed > this ability, this is a bad thing. Oh dear... In such a configuration, how did the netpoll code "tell" who the receive packets were for or did it send them to all registered netpoll clients for that device? Just curious. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 4/7] netpoll: fix ->poll() locking, Jeff Moyer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: NAPI, e100, and system performance problem, Greg Banks |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 4/7] netpoll: fix ->poll() locking, Jeff Moyer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 4/7] netpoll: fix ->poll() locking, Matt Mackall |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |