Le lundi 12 avril 2010 à 18:37 +0800, Cong Wang a écrit : > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > There is no protection on dev->priv_flags for SMP access. > > It would better bit value in dev->state if you are using it as control flag. > > > > Then you could use > > if (unlikely(test_and_clear_bit(__IN_NETPOLL, &skb->dev->state))) > > netpoll_send_skb(...) > > > > > > Hmm, I think we can't use ->state here, it is not for this kind of purpose, > according to its comments. > > Also, I find other usages of IFF_XXX flags of ->priv_flags are also using > &, | to set or clear the flags. So there must be some other things preventing > the race... Yes, its RTNL that protects priv_flags changes, hopefully... _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
