[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-netdev
Subject:    Re: Problem with dev_kfree_skb_any() in 2.6.0
From:       "David S. Miller" <davem () redhat ! com>
Date:       2004-03-29 15:46:16
Message-ID: 047401c415a4$f8bf1a30$d100000a () sbs2003 ! local
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:58:07 -0500
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 12:42:18PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> > Though, is there any particular reason you don't like adding a
> > "|| irqs_disabled()" check to the if statement instead?
> > I prefer that solution better actually.
> 
> Yep, in fact when I wrote the above message, I came across a couple when I
> was pondering...
> * the destructor runs in a more predictable context.
> * given the problem that started this thread, the 'if' test is a
>   potentially problematic area.  Why not eliminate all possibility that
>   this problem will occur again?

The way I see this, dev_kfree_skb_any() is not used in any performance critical
path, so at worst during device shutdown, reset, or power-down, TX queue
packet freeing work could be delayed by up to one jiffie.

Therefore I've put the "|| irqs_disabled()" version of the fix into my tree.

Thanks for working this out with me Jeff :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]