Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Jan 2003 18:19:55 +0100 | From | Manfred Spraul <> | Subject | Re: [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
disable_irq(); spin_lock(&np->lock);
That's what 8390.c uses, no need for an #ifdef.
-- Manfred
- 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/
| |