From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David S\. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFT] bridge: eliminate port_check workqueue
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:46:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070222084610.GA2399@ff.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070221105555.4d1b40a6@freekitty>
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 10:55:55AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> This is what I was suggesting by getting rid of the work queue completely.
...
> --- bridge.orig/net/bridge/br_if.c 2007-02-21 10:22:46.000000000 -0800
> +++ bridge/net/bridge/br_if.c 2007-02-21 10:53:25.000000000 -0800
> @@ -77,26 +77,15 @@
> * Called from work queue to allow for calling functions that
> * might sleep (such as speed check), and to debounce.
> */
What about this comment?
> -static void port_carrier_check(struct work_struct *work)
> +void br_port_carrier_check(struct net_bridge_port *p)
Of course my opinion shouldn't matter here, but it looks
like withdrawing (or giving up) to the older way. So I'm
not excited, but I trust there is a reason for this.
Cheers,
Jarek P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-22 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-20 22:19 [PATCH] net/bridge/br_if.c: fix possible use-after-free in port_carrier_check() Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-21 0:24 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-02-21 8:23 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-02-21 9:29 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-02-21 14:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-21 18:55 ` [RFT] bridge: eliminate port_check workqueue Stephen Hemminger
2007-02-21 20:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-21 21:19 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-02-21 21:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-02-22 8:46 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2007-02-21 14:22 ` [PATCH] net/bridge/br_if.c: fix possible use-after-free in port_carrier_check() Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070222084610.GA2399@ff.dom.local \
--to=jarkao2@o2.pl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.