Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH][ATM] use rtnl_{lock,unlock} during device operations (take 2) | Date | Fri, 06 Jun 2003 06:58:20 -0400 | From | chas williams <> |
| |
In message <20030606.023618.13768006.davem@redhat.com>,"David S. Miller" writes: >Are you sure nothing needs to walk the list in interrupt or softint >context? That's why you can't normally protect all of it using the >RTNL semaphore, because walks occur in non-sleepable contexts.
oddly enough, i dont believe the list is iterated in interrupt context.
>Read the comment above dev_base in drivers/net/Space.c to see what >the intended locking model is.
yeah, i already read that. it has a bit of a typo (rtln indeed). it looks like rtnl_lock() is also used to protect dev_ioctl's (thus my usage in atm_ioctl) and protect lookup's like __dev_get_by_name. i didnt get rid of atm_dev_lock, i just dont use it unless writing or if i couldnt safely use rtnl when a reader is iterating (like atm_dev_hold() which could be called at interrupt--though no one does). i thought this was the idea. - 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/
| |