From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Schichan Subject: Re: freeze with interface rename & SIOCGIFNAME Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 19:12:43 +0200 Message-ID: <51C9CF8B.6030502@freebox.fr> References: <51C9BB9C.4050405@freebox.fr> <1372176951.3301.103.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <51C9C4FF.1020706@freebox.fr> <1372179447.3301.105.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1372179933.3301.106.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Cong Wang To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from ns0.vlq16.iliad.fr ([213.36.7.21]:60492 "EHLO ns0.vlq16.iliad.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751645Ab3FYRMp (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:12:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1372179933.3301.106.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/25/2013 07:05 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 09:57 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > >> I am not sure it's needed, because the writer holds a spinlock and is >> not allowed to sleep or being preempted. >> >> If it's needed, there is a bug somewhere else... > > Oh well, its a write_seqcount, so no spinlock... That's what I was going to reply. Am I right in thinking that the process spinning on SIOCGIFNAME should be naturally be preempted by other tasks by the scheduler once its timeslice has expired or am I missing something ? -- Nicolas Schichan Freebox SAS