Re: PATCH: bonding might sleep with lock held

Andi Kleen [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, 13 May 2004 11:44:45 -0700
Jay Vosburgh [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

	It will race against the timers, although I don't see anything
in there offhand that would conflict.  It just feels somehow unclean to
do it without the lock.

Why should the timers care if there can be a packet received from the 
network or not?  (this is all what dev_remove_pack prevents) 

	The concern I had was that the timers might modify the fields of
the bonding structure accessed outside the lock, but they don't.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com