From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.18 2/3] tg3: Convert to non-LLTX Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 17:31:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20060605173159.33d81d59@localhost.localdomain> References: <1149536852.13155.7.camel@rh4> <20060605155834.031d37a2@localhost.localdomain> <1149542985.13155.11.camel@rh4> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, jgarzik@pobox.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:206 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750949AbWFFAcM (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:32:12 -0400 To: "Michael Chan" In-Reply-To: <1149542985.13155.11.camel@rh4> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:29:45 -0700 "Michael Chan" wrote: > On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 15:58 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > > Since you are going more lockless, you probably need memory barriers. > > No, we're not going more lockless. We're simply replacing the private > tx_lock with dev->xmit_lock by dropping the LLTX feature flag. The > amount of locking is exactly the same as before. Those spin lock's were also acting as barriers. Are you sure code is safe in the face of cpu reordering. -- If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged. -- Cardinal Richlieu