Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Apr 2005 18:09:49 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC,PATCH 3/4] Change synchronize_kernel to _rcu and _sched |
| |
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 01:16:53AM +0200, Francois Romieu wrote: > Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com> : > > This patch changes calls to synchronize_kernel(), deprecated in the > > earlier "Deprecate synchronize_kernel, GPL replacement" patch to > > instead call the new synchronize_rcu() and synchronize_sched() APIs. > [...] > > diff -urpN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/net/r8169.c linux-2.6.12-rc1-bettersk/drivers/net/r8169.c > > --- linux-2.6.12-rc1/drivers/net/r8169.c Thu Mar 31 09:53:08 2005 > > +++ linux-2.6.12-rc1-bettersk/drivers/net/r8169.c Fri Apr 1 21:41:38 2005 > > @@ -2385,7 +2385,7 @@ core_down: > > } > > > > /* Give a racing hard_start_xmit a few cycles to complete. */ > > - synchronize_kernel(); > > + synchronize_sched(); /* FIXME: should this be synchronize_irq()? */ > > > > /* > > * And now for the 50k$ question: are IRQ disabled or not ? > > (answering the FIXME) > > The race with the irq is handled somewhere else. As the comment suggests, > this part is racing with the hard_start_xmit() handler. If I read correctly > net/core/dev.c::dev_queue_xmit, the code above simply needs the new > synchronize_rcu().
That would be good! In your reading of the code, did you verify that all instances of calls to hard_start_xmit() are in fact under either rcu_read_lock() or rcu_read_lock_bh()?
Thanx, Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |