From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Pull request for 'ipg-fixes' branch Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:22:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20080111172216.GA3927@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: <20080110233508.GA13315@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <20080111015851.25008.qmail@science.horizon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: davem@davemloft.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jeff@garzik.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: linux@horizon.com Return-path: Received: from electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com ([213.41.134.224]:41425 "EHLO electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759283AbYAKRfv (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:35:51 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080111015851.25008.qmail@science.horizon.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: linux@horizon.com : [...] > I notice that the vendor-supplied driver doesn't have these bugs. The M in POMS stands for "my". [...] > Would you be interested in some cleanup patches ? Yes. > In particular, I think I can get rid of tx->lock entirely, or at least > take it off the fast path. All it's protecting is the write to > sp->tx_current, and a few judicious memory barriers can deal with that. I have done a kind of memory barrier trick for the r8169 in the past but it is not clear that I would do it again. Today I would argue more strongly in direction of similar locking amongst different drivers. The tg3 driver is a good model imho. Anyway you have been here for some time so I see no reason to kill any different/new locking scheme you could come with. Off until sunday. -- Ueimor