[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <D5C1322C3E673F459512FB59E0DDC32902FFCE03@orsmsx414.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 12:55:50 -0700
From: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To: "Krishna Kumar2" <krkumar2@...ibm.com>,
"Sridhar Samudrala" <sri@...ibm.com>
Cc: "Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <hadi@...erus.ca>,
<jeff@...zik.org>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
<kaber@...sh.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support.
> I thought the correct use is to get this lock on clean_tx
> side which can get called on a different cpu on rx (which
> also cleans up slots for skbs that have finished xmit). Both
> TX and clean_tx uses the same tx_ring's head/tail ptrs and
> should be exclusive. But I don't find clean tx using this
> lock in the code, so I am confused :-)
>From e1000_main.c, e1000_clean():
/* e1000_clean is called per-cpu. This lock protects
* tx_ring[0] from being cleaned by multiple cpus
* simultaneously. A failure obtaining the lock means
* tx_ring[0] is currently being cleaned anyway. */
if (spin_trylock(&adapter->tx_queue_lock)) {
tx_cleaned = e1000_clean_tx_irq(adapter,
&adapter->tx_ring[0]);
spin_unlock(&adapter->tx_queue_lock);
}
In a multi-ring implementation of the driver, this is wrapped with for
(i = 0; i < adapter->num_tx_queues; i++) and &adapter->tx_ring[i]. This
lock also prevents the clean routine from stomping on xmit_frame() when
transmitting. Also in the multi-ring implementation, the tx_lock is
pushed down into the individual tx_ring struct, not at the adapter
level.
Cheers,
-PJ Waskiewicz
peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com
-
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