| To: | Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev |
| From: | Max Krasnyansky <maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:03:08 -0700 |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030611132715.76a485c7.shemminger@osdl.org> |
| References: | <20030611194317.GE31051@gtf.org> <20030609115857.38bb31d6.shemminger@osdl.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20030611121155.0b659e20@unixmail.qualcomm.com> <20030611194317.GE31051@gtf.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
At 01:27 PM 6/11/2003, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:43:18 -0400 >Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > This is wrong. register_netdevice() does not expand name (ie %d stuff). >> > So dev_alloc_name() is still needed. i.e. >> >> Correct. >> >> But, register_netdev() is preferred precisely for this reason. >> > >Not possible in this case because device is created off socket ioctl so it is >called with rtnl_lock Yep. But not because it's created from socket ioctl. Because it has to guaranty atomicity. Max |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, Stephen Hemminger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Florian Weimer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, Stephen Hemminger |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |