From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] NETIF_F_LLTX for devices 2 Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:21:16 +0200 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20040911142116.GL4431@wotan.suse.de> References: <20040908065152.GC27886@wotan.suse.de> <20040908072408.GI27886@wotan.suse.de> <1094629677.1089.155.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20040908134713.1bcd46d3.davem@davemloft.net> <1094823215.1121.129.camel@jzny.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "David S. Miller" , ak@suse.de, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: jamal Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1094823215.1121.129.camel@jzny.localdomain> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 09:33:35AM -0400, jamal wrote: > On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 16:47, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > > We are merely moving the sch_generic.c locking logic into the > > drivers. The behavior is entirely equivalent except that one > > level of unnecessary locking has been removed. > > > > I think his change is valid, will not break existing drivers (as > > you mentioned as well Jamal), and works well for the cases he has > > shown patches of. So I'm going to apply his patch. > > > > BTW, if we are really concerned about some existing driver returning > > -1 from hard_start_xmit() without the new feature flag being enabled, > > we can test for that and log a debugging message if it happens. The -1 test is only done when LLTX is set. So even when a existing driver does that it's fine. Only the drivers that set the new bit need to be checked. > > I am not 100% happy but let me do some testing on it. Would the best > image be the latest bk snapshot? What exactly are you not happy about? -Andi