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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:09:52 +0800 From: <wyb@...sec.com.cn> To: <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Cc: "'Herbert Xu'" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Subject: RE:RE: is it useful testing __LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED in dev_close()? __LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED still exist in kernel 2.6.23.8. Netdevice.h: /* Test if receive needs to be scheduled */ static inline int __netif_rx_schedule_prep(struct net_device *dev) { return !test_and_set_bit(__LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED, &dev->state); } /* Test if receive needs to be scheduled but only if up */ static inline int netif_rx_schedule_prep(struct net_device *dev) { return netif_running(dev) && __netif_rx_schedule_prep(dev); } Dev.c: int dev_close(struct net_device *dev) { ... while (test_bit(__LINK_STATE_RX_SCHED, &dev->state)) { /* No hurry. */ msleep(1); } ... } Test_bit() in dev_close() maybe between the calling of netif_running() and __netif_rx_schedule_prep() in netif_rx_schedule_prep. - 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