[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1241800225.29604.282.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 17:30:25 +0100
From: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
To: ccaulfie@...hat.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: decnet: Use data ready call back, rather than hand coding it
Chrissie, can you test this? I don't have a suitable set up at the
moment. This should be correct though since its taken directly from
sock_queue_rcv_skb from whence the original code was also take in times
past. I did compile test it though.
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
diff --git a/net/decnet/dn_nsp_in.c b/net/decnet/dn_nsp_in.c
index 5d8a2a5..932408d 100644
--- a/net/decnet/dn_nsp_in.c
+++ b/net/decnet/dn_nsp_in.c
@@ -578,6 +578,7 @@ out:
static __inline__ int dn_queue_skb(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, int sig, struct sk_buff_head *queue)
{
int err;
+ int skb_len;
/* Cast skb->rcvbuf to unsigned... It's pointless, but reduces
number of warnings when compiling with -W --ANK
@@ -592,22 +593,12 @@ static __inline__ int dn_queue_skb(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, int sig
if (err)
goto out;
+ skb_len = skb->len;
skb_set_owner_r(skb, sk);
skb_queue_tail(queue, skb);
- /* This code only runs from BH or BH protected context.
- * Therefore the plain read_lock is ok here. -DaveM
- */
- read_lock(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
- if (!sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD)) {
- struct socket *sock = sk->sk_socket;
- wake_up_interruptible(sk->sk_sleep);
- if (sock && sock->fasync_list &&
- !test_bit(SOCK_ASYNC_WAITDATA, &sock->flags))
- __kill_fasync(sock->fasync_list, sig,
- (sig == SIGURG) ? POLL_PRI : POLL_IN);
- }
- read_unlock(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
+ if (!sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD))
+ sk->sk_data_ready(sk, skb_len);
out:
return err;
}
--
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