[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ada1wesy2eh.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:27:18 -0700
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
jgarzik@...ox.com, hadi@...erus.ca, rusty@...tcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC]: napi_struct V4
> Most drivers are in good shape, although some still have very
> questionable netif_rx_complete() handling, in that racy area that
> Rusty and myself were discussing today.
>
> My inclination is to wrap those sequences around with an IRQ
> safe spinlock to fix the race provably, and then if driver
> authors want to optimize that away with techniques like those
> that tg3, bnx2, sky2, skge et al. use, that's fine but can
> be done later.
Ouch... that extra lock seems pretty expensive. Also I'm having a
hard time understanding how the techniques you're alluding to apply to
devices that may miss events when enabling interrupts; the drivers you
mention all seem to be for devices that didn't have the race and
didn't use netif_rx_reschedule() in the old NAPI world. Can you
provide a little more detail on how the lock could be optimized away?
Thanks,
Roland
-
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