Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:37:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:37:35 -0500 Received: from locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil ([134.207.10.66]:11925 "EHLO locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:37:34 -0500 Message-Id: <200303051447.h25ElcGi006199@locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil> To: Werner Almesberger cc: "David S. Miller" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][ATM] make atm (and clip) modular + try_module_get() In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 03 Mar 2003 23:07:06 -0300." <20030303230706.R2791@almesberger.net> X-url: http://www.nrl.navy.mil/CCS/people/chas/index.html X-mailer: nmh 1.0 Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 09:47:38 -0500 From: chas williams Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1029 Lines: 27 In message <20030303230706.R2791@almesberger.net>,Werner Almesberger writes: >see getting moved to net/core/skbuff.c, because it seems to provide >a reasonably generic function. it has been suggested to me that the locking in skb_migrate might not be completely correct. any comments on the following? spinlock_t *first, *second; if ((unsigned long)from < (unsigned long) to)) { first = &from->lock; second = &to->lock; } else { first = &to->lock; second = &from->lock; } local_irq_save(flags); spin_lock(&first); spin_lock(&second); i imagine this is to prevent deadlocks when you do something silly like skb_migrate(a,b) and then skb_migrate(b,a) elsewhere. - 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/