| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200711201028.AYF43414@topsec.com.cn> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:26:26 +0800 From: <wyb@...sec.com.cn> To: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: is it useful testing __LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED in dev_close()? cpu0 calling netif_rx_schedule_prep(), cpu1 calling dev_close(): cpu0: testing __LINK_STATE_START, already set cpu1: clear__LINK_STATE_START cpu1: testing __LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED, not set cpu0: set __LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED cpu0: enter net poll, ... when cpu1 return from dev_close(),__LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED is still set. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists