[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51C9CF8B.6030502@freebox.fr>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 19:12:43 +0200
From: Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@...ebox.fr>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: freeze with interface rename & SIOCGIFNAME
On 06/25/2013 07:05 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 09:57 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>> I am not sure it's needed, because the writer holds a spinlock and is
>> not allowed to sleep or being preempted.
>>
>> If it's needed, there is a bug somewhere else...
>
> Oh well, its a write_seqcount, so no spinlock...
That's what I was going to reply.
Am I right in thinking that the process spinning on SIOCGIFNAME should be
naturally be preempted by other tasks by the scheduler once its timeslice has
expired or am I missing something ?
--
Nicolas Schichan
Freebox SAS
--
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