Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 5 May 2003 15:54:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To:        Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
Cc:        cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305051553240.5929-100000@root.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030505202844.GA972@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 6 May 2003, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 06:24:08PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote:
> >I have run various versions of the patch for about 3 weeks and the final
> >version with no changes for about a week, all without Giant.  The reason
> >why I did not see ifnet problems even though I processed ~400M packets was
> >because all ifnet processing happened to be with the fxp lock held and my
> >laptop only had one network interface.  This is not an intentional part of
> >the patch; it is not an attempt to protect ifnet with a local fxp lock!  
> 
> What about the loopback interface (and maybe other virtual interfaces)?
> Do you have lo0 disabled or does something else protect it?

ifnet locking is the answer



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0305051553240.5929-100000>