netdev
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] More ethtool support for sis900

from [Daniele Venzano] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] More ethtool support for sis900
From: Daniele Venzano <webvenza@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 11:03:54 +0100
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050306001546.GE25116@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
References: <20050305134011.23638.68926@localhost.localdomain> <4229FA32.4000401@pobox.com> <02a49476862ae18433e5b80aafa616fd@libero.it> <20050306001546.GE25116@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx 

On 06/mar/05, at 01:15, Francois Romieu wrote:

Daniele Venzano <webvenza@xxxxxxxxx> :
[...]

I saw the locking, but I couldn't come up with a reason for it. Is it
needed because of kernel wide preemption ?


Usually you do not want simultaneous accesses to the mii interface
(link events, Tx timeout recovery or so).

From a quick glance at the sis900 driver, I would expect the lock to
protect against sis900_timer() (assuming you add a simple spinlock to
it as well).

Yes, that makes sense. Will do.

Thanks.

--
Daniele Venzano
http://www.brownhat.org


[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: [PATCH 1/1] More ethtool support for sis900 (with locking), Daniele Venzano
Next by Date:  Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles, Herbert Xu
Previous by Thread:  Re: [PATCH 1/1] More ethtool support for sis900, Francois Romieu
Next by Thread:  Re: [PATCH]: r8169: Expose hardware stats via ethtool, Richard Dawe
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]