[Top] [All Lists]

Re: tx_timeout and timer serialisation

To: andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: tx_timeout and timer serialisation
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 22:24:39 -0700
Cc: saw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, becker@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <39262113.19447850@xxxxxxxxxx> (message from Andrew Morton on Sat, 20 May 2000 15:22:27 +1000)
References: <3925BB00.B1CDDFE7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005192039250.825-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005192039250.825-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from "Donald Becker" on Fri, May 19, 2000 at 08:48:15PM <20000520122715.A7682@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <39262113.19447850@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
   Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 15:22:27 +1000
   From: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>

   I have just written a little kernel module which has confirmed that the
   handler-keeps-running-after-del_timer bug exists in both 2.2.14 and
   2.3.99-pre9.  Not good.  Very not good, IMO.

I just noticed this thread, and has del_timer_sync been mentioned yet?
That is what should be used to make sure the timer is done in 2.3.x,
unless something else prevents it's usage (locking conflict).

   ( I wanna know why my kernel thread shows up in ps as "insmod
   timertest.o" but everyone else's has nifty names like "[kflushd]" )

sprintf(current->comm, "nifty name");

David S. Miller

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>