> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 10:35 AM > > --- > > drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++++------------------ > --- > > 1 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c > > b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c index 53e1e29..4ed4ab8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c > > @@ -38,12 +38,15 @@ > > #include "vmbus_api.h" > > #include "utils.h" > > > > +/* > > + * Buffer used to receive packets from Hyper-V */ static u8 > > +*chan_buf; > > One buffer is nicer, yes, but what's controlling access to this buffer? > You use it in multiple functions, and what's to say those functions can't be > called at the same time on different cpus? So, shouldn't you either have > some locking for access to the buffer, or have a per-function buffer instead? > > And if you have a per-function buffer, again, you might need to control > access to it as the functions could be called multiple times at the same time, > right? > The current versions of Hyper-V support interrupt handling on CPU0 only. I can make multiple buffers per channel, but because of Hyper-V implementation It does not really make a difference. Hank. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
