Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: tun.c patch to fix "smp_processor_id() in preemptible code" | From | Lee Revell <> | Date | Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:10:58 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 17:54, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:51:17PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote: > > > > Ok, here is the correct patch. If this is really just a matter of > > performance, and not required for correctness, disabling preemption is > > broken, right? > > No if you're doing this then you should get rid of netif_rx_ni() > altogether. But before you do that please ask all the people who > call it.
There are not a lot of them:
drivers/s390/net/ctcmain.c drivers/s390/net/netiucv.c drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c drivers/net/tun.c
>From netiuvc.c:
/* * Since receiving is always initiated from a tasklet (in iucv.c), * we must use netif_rx_ni() instead of netif_rx() */
This implies that the author thought it was a matter of correctness to use netif_rx_ni vs. netif_rx. But it looks like the only difference is that the former sacrifices preempt-safety for performance.
I could not find maintainers for the two s390 drivers, or a specific maintainer for vlsi_ir.
Lee
- 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/
| |