Le lundi 12 avril 2010 à 18:37 +0800, Cong Wang a écrit :
quoted text
> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > There is no protection on dev->priv_flags for SMP access.
> > It would better bit value in dev->state if you are using it as control flag.
> > 
> > Then you could use 
> > 			if (unlikely(test_and_clear_bit(__IN_NETPOLL, &skb->dev->state)))
> > 				netpoll_send_skb(...)
> > 
> > 
> 
> Hmm, I think we can't use ->state here, it is not for this kind of purpose,
> according to its comments.
> 
> Also, I find other usages of IFF_XXX flags of ->priv_flags are also using
> &, | to set or clear the flags. So there must be some other things preventing
> the race...

Yes, its RTNL that protects priv_flags changes, hopefully...


--
unsubscribe notice
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/