On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 04:41:49PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:59:21 -0400 (EDT), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I haven't tested this, although kernel/sys.c source file compiles okay. > > A complete patch would have to adjust the definitions of all 22 existing > > notifier chains. > > > > Is this worth pursuing? > > I think it is, but only if the result can be used in Greg's new code.
If it goes in, I'll use it instead of my local copy. > If you go for it, prepare for talking to netdev@, and they will ask > about taking and dropping the spinlock at every iteration when > traversing. They are very sensitive to performance. Are they really doing notifier callbacks on fast network paths? Ugh... greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
