[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFdo_mUZembr4MEGUt9efNtfnuCs4ddHUCDjLE64WnWwytTpzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:54:50 +0100
From: Igor Maravić <igorm@....rs>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: Support for byte queue limits
>
> Reread what I said : "BQL must be lightweight"
>
> Not : "No lock should be used"
>
> OK ?
>
I'm out of ideas.
Do you think, if I remove netdev_reset_queue(tp->dev); from
rtl8169_init_ring_indexes,
and spin_locks, of course, that would be a good solution.
As far as I could see in marvell/sky2.c, sfc/tx.c and intel/e1000e/netdev.c
netdev_completed is called with out any lock.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
BR
Igor
--
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