[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH]Re: spin_locks without smp.
Alan wrote:

>On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 13:04, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Okay, what I'm getting here is that the UP case already has preempt
>> disabled b/c the locks are taken in IRQ context?
>The tx/timeout path isnt always in IRQ context.
It is.
tx and timeout are both called at BH context with the dev_xmit spinlock
held. See Documentation/networking/netdevices.txt

What about


That's what 8390.c uses, no need for an #ifdef.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.051 / U:1.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site