[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <466B2826.2060007@garzik.org>
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2007 18:22:30 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Mithlesh Thukral <mithlesh@...xen.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, amitkale@...xen.com,
netxenproj@...syssoft.com, rob@...xen.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] NetXen: Fix link status messages
Mithlesh Thukral wrote:
> - if ((netif_running(netdev)) && !netif_carrier_ok(netdev)) {
> - printk(KERN_INFO "%s port %d, %s carrier is now ok\n",
> - netxen_nic_driver_name, adapter->portnum, netdev->name);
> + if ((netdev->flags & IFF_UP) && !netif_carrier_ok(netdev) &&
> + netxen_nic_link_ok(adapter) ) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO "%s %s (port %d), Link is up\n",
> + netxen_nic_driver_name, netdev->name, adapter->portnum);
> netif_carrier_on(netdev);
> - }
> -
> - if (netif_queue_stopped(netdev))
> netif_wake_queue(netdev);
> + } else if(!(netdev->flags & IFF_UP) && netif_carrier_ok(netdev)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s %s Link is Down\n",
> + netxen_nic_driver_name, netdev->name);
> + netif_carrier_off(netdev);
> + netif_stop_queue(netdev);
Most of the patch is OK, but by substituting IFF_UP tests for
netif_running(), you are removing race-free, correct tests and replacing
them with incorrect, racy tests.
NAK the IFF_UP changes. the rest looks OK.
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