* Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2007-03-09 15:27
> That's the entire point of this extra locking. enqueue() is going to
> put an skb into a band somewhere that maps to some queue, and there is
> no way to guarantee the skb I retrieve from dequeue() is headed for the
> same queue. Therefore, I need to unlock the queue after I finish
> enqueuing, since having that lock makes little sense to dequeue().
> dequeue() will then grab *a* lock on a queue; it may be the same one we
> had during enqueue(), but it may not be. And the placement of the
> unlock of that queue is exactly where it happens in non-multiqueue,
> which is right before the hard_start_xmit().
The lock is already unlocked after dequeue, from your prio_dequeue():
if (netif_is_multiqueue(sch->dev)) {
queue = q->band2queue[prio];
if (spin_trylock(&sch->dev->egress_subqueue[queue].queue_lock)) {
qdisc = q->queues[prio];
skb = qdisc->dequeue(qdisc);
if (skb) {
sch->q.qlen--;
skb->priority = prio;
spin_unlock(&sch->dev->egress_subqueue[queue].queue_lock);
return skb;
}
spin_unlock(&sch->dev->egress_subqueue[queue].queue_lock);
}
-
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
