On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 01:12:17AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> +static struct socket *__icmp_socket[NR_CPUS];
> +#define icmp_socket __icmp_socket[smp_processor_id()]
This should be per-cpu data
> -static __inline__ int icmp_xmit_lock(void)
> +static __inline__ void icmp_xmit_lock(void)
> {
> - int ret;
> local_bh_disable();
> - ret = icmp_xmit_lock_bh();
> - if (ret)
> - local_bh_enable();
> - return ret;
> -}
>
> -static void icmp_xmit_unlock_bh(void)
> -{
> - icmp_xmit_holder = -1;
> - spin_unlock(&icmp_socket->sk->lock.slock);
> + if (!spin_trylock(&icmp_socket->sk->lock.slock))
> + BUG();
unlikely()?
> -static __inline__ void icmp_xmit_unlock(void)
> +static void icmp_xmit_unlock(void)
> {
> - icmp_xmit_unlock_bh();
> + spin_unlock(&icmp_socket->sk->lock.slock);
> local_bh_enable();
spin_unlock_bh
> + icmp_xmit_lock();
Hmm, and I guess the code would be much more readable if you used
the spin_lock call directly. The impliclit icmp_socket doesn't
really help readability either.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
