Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:49:23 +0200
Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simple. Reading the code of synchronize_net() and
netif_stop_queue() and thinking about why it breaks, instead
of committing bugfixes that only substitute one bug by another. ;)
I'll take a look, too.
Why are you doing the synchronize_net()? it is meant for RCU.
We know and it no longer is in the code. We have known for a couple of days that
it was the synchronize_net() step that led to the netdev timeouts, but we were
afraid that a bare netif_stop_queue would not be SMP safe. The current structure has
mutex_lock
netif_tx_disable(dev) (equivalent to netif_tx_lock_bh(dev);
netif_stop_queue(dev);
netif_tx_unlock_bh(dev);
spin_lock_irqsafe
I see you listed as a maintainer in several network-related parts of the system,
so AFAIK, you are a network guru. Do you think this will work? I have tested
code with just a netif_stop_queue (without the lock_bh/unlock_bh parts) on a UP
system and have gotten no errors, but I do not have access to SMP hardware.
Thanks,
Larry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
