On 15-02-2007 23:37, Francois Romieu wrote: > Your usual dont-flush_scheduled_work-with-RTNL-held stuff. > > It is a bit different here since the thread runs permanently > or is only occasionally kicked for recovery depending on the > hardware revision. > > Signed-off-by: Francois Romieu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > drivers/net/8139too.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/8139too.c b/drivers/net/8139too.c > index 35ad5cf..99304b2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/8139too.c > +++ b/drivers/net/8139too.c > @@ -1109,6 +1109,8 @@ static void __devexit rtl8139_remove_one (struct > pci_dev *pdev) > > assert (dev != NULL); > > + flush_scheduled_work(); > +
IMHO there should be rather cancel_rearming_delayed_work instead of this. > unregister_netdev (dev); > > __rtl8139_cleanup_dev (dev); > @@ -1603,18 +1605,21 @@ static void rtl8139_thread (struct work_struct *work) > struct net_device *dev = tp->mii.dev; > unsigned long thr_delay = next_tick; > > + rtnl_lock(); > + > + if (!netif_running(dev)) > + goto out_unlock; I wonder, why you don't do netif_running before rtnl_lock? It's an atomic operation. And I'm not sure if increasing rtnl_lock range is really needed here. Regards, Jarek P. - 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
