[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1292336483.20458.1.camel@bwh-desktop>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:21:23 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, sathyap@...verengines.com,
subbus@...verengines.com, sarveshwarb@...verengines.com,
ajitk@...verengines.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6] be2net: use semaphore instead of spin lock for
mbox_lock
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 14:46 +0100, Ivan Vecera wrote:
> Since the mbox polling uses the schedule_timeout, the mbox_lock should be
> a semaphore and not a spin lock.
> The commit f25b03a replaced udelay() with schedule_timeout() but didn't
> change the mbox_lock to a semaphore or a mutex.
[...]
I see no reason for this to be a semaphore; use a mutex instead.
Ben
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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