From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH] [e1000]: Remove unnecessary tx_lock Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:33:52 -0400 Message-ID: <1155000832.5138.31.camel@jzny2> References: <20060804110829.62136ebb@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <20060804.163111.85390037.davem@davemloft.net> <1154797002.5081.21.camel@jzny2> <20060805230517.GA25468@gondor.apana.org.au> <1154819868.5517.34.camel@jzny2> <20060805231959.GA25768@gondor.apana.org.au> <1154821010.5517.48.camel@jzny2> <20060806025123.GA27051@gondor.apana.org.au> <1154867083.6269.35.camel@jzny2> <1154999971.5138.19.camel@jzny2> <20060808012217.GA12468@gondor.apana.org.au> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , shemminger@osdl.org, mchan@broadcom.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com, "Edgar E. Iglesias" , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx02.cybersurf.com ([209.197.145.105]:51425 "EHLO mx02.cybersurf.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751167AbWHHBd4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:33:56 -0400 Received: from mail.cyberus.ca ([209.197.145.21]) by mx02.cybersurf.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1GAGTq-000604-AN for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:34:02 -0400 To: Herbert Xu In-Reply-To: <20060808012217.GA12468@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 11:22 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > I'm not sure if this is safe. What if the other side clears QDISC_RUNNING > right after you test it here? Wouldn't you miss the schedule altogether? > Is there a need for a schedule if that happens? i.e assuming that the clearing happens because there are no more packets to process. OTOH, if the other side sets the QDISC_RUNNING right after the test, then qdisc is running will be entered. cheers, jamal