From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Rompf Subject: Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 16:36:35 +0100 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <3DE39503.4A24DCB2@isg.de> References: <3DE33D6D.25B9C9B4@isg.de> <20021126.021546.91313706.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hi, > This locking below achieves nothing. Ok, so I was too cautious by locking read access to a one byte structure. I'll change that and read additional documentation on SMP ;-) > Probably something else in > the device struct can be reused. Right now, I don't see which. There are other spinlocks available in the net_device structure, but they are used by the queuing code and we should not give up the semantic that netif_set_operstate() can be called from everywhere. One global spinlock may be acceptable for this special case. > I also don't think this should be conditional, either we want > it or we don't. The conditional stuff is inspired from my first 2.4 version, but I'm happy to remove it. Btw, can you also have a look the 2.4 backport of my link state notification feature (posting available under http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=103722967214290&w=2, just one typo fixed in Configure.help since then). Is this stuff acceptable for 2.4? Cheers, Stefan