Dear Gregory,
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:49:40 +0100 Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> Hi Jisheng,
>
> On mer., mars 09 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
>
> > Dear Gregory,
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 13:57:04 +0100 Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> >
> >> In the previous patch, the spinlock was not initialized. While
Hi Jisheng,
On mer., mars 09 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> Dear Gregory,
>
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 13:57:04 +0100 Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
>
>> In the previous patch, the spinlock was not initialized. While it didn't
>> cause any trouble yet it could be a problem to use it uninitialized.
>>
>> The
Dear Gregory,
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 13:57:04 +0100 Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> In the previous patch, the spinlock was not initialized. While it didn't
> cause any trouble yet it could be a problem to use it uninitialized.
>
> The most annoying part was the critical section protected by the spinlock
>
In the previous patch, the spinlock was not initialized. While it didn't
cause any trouble yet it could be a problem to use it uninitialized.
The most annoying part was the critical section protected by the spinlock
in mvneta_stop(). Some of the functions could sleep as pointed when
activated CONF
