From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: hadi@cyberus.ca
Cc: ak@suse.de, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NETIF_F_LLTX for devices 2
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 17:45:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040911174535.2acbb957.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1094933731.2343.109.camel@jzny.localdomain>
On 11 Sep 2004 16:15:32 -0400
jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca> wrote:
> If i was the one who had thought of the need for this new lock-riddance
> then i would have done it as follows:
> - have a devices xmit_lock as an alias to this other lock in case of
> NETIF_F_LLTX
> Then you wouldnt have to touch this code. Infact if it is not too late
> why not do it like that?
If you turn dev->xmit_lock into a spinlock pointer, that would
incur much deeper changes across the tree than Andi's version
because there are a lot of xmit_lock explicit references out
there.
I think Andi made the right choice for his implementation.
And frankly I don't what is worrying about the
"-1" return value, it can occur in only one spot in a very
specific controlled case and it's behavior is incredibly well
defined (if not by accurate comments then by the code itself :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-12 0:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-07 12:05 [PATCH] NETIF_F_LLTX for devices 2 Andi Kleen
2004-09-07 21:39 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-07 21:53 ` jamal
2004-09-08 6:51 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-08 7:07 ` Herbert Xu
2004-09-08 7:24 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-08 7:47 ` jamal
2004-09-08 20:47 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-10 13:33 ` jamal
2004-09-10 23:02 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-11 14:21 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-11 20:15 ` jamal
2004-09-12 0:45 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2004-09-12 9:57 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-12 10:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-12 10:25 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-12 11:03 ` Francois Romieu
2004-09-13 0:13 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-12 16:16 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-12 17:34 ` jamal
2004-09-13 0:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-13 0:10 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-13 2:52 ` Andrew Grover
2004-09-13 6:59 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-13 16:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-13 0:12 ` Jeff Garzik
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=20040911174535.2acbb957.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).