>2.1.126 deadlock due OOM but doesn't lockup). He uses a 3c509 and I seen
>that 2.1.127 add some spinlock that cause the kernel to execute netif_rx()
>with the spin locked inside the irq handler.
The netif_rx() I pointed out above is sure fine because it only queue the
packet or it drops/free it if the backlog queue is full...
And looking more closely to the code such spinlocks seems fine and needed
(also in UP) to avoid to play with the card in the irq handler for
receiving data while the kernel was tramsitting data at the same time...
Andrea Arcangeli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/