[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45A421B3.4020301@garzik.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:13:55 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
CC: fubar@...ibm.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bonding: eliminate RTNL assertion spew
Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> -void bond_alb_handle_active_change(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *new_slave)
> +void bond_alb_handle_active_change(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *new_slave, int rtnl_locked)
> {
> struct slave *swap_slave;
> int i;
Although this is not a direct NAK (haven't read the full patch yet),
conditional locking behavior like this is /very/ fragile, and in Linux
is generally discouraged. Vendor drivers in particular have a history
of constantly getting this wrong, and it makes locking more difficult to
review.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists