On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:31 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Please don't use double underscore, for this function name. There is no
> reason to not make it a normal API call.
>
> The sky2 fix I am working on will use napi_synchronize as well.
Allright. A compiler barrier in the !SMP case makes sense, but I would
still want an smp_mb() before the test_bit. I think it's a bug in
synchronize_irq not to have it.
Cheers,
Ben.
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h 2007-10-16 16:48:20.000000000 -0700
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h 2007-10-17 08:29:55.000000000 -0700
> @@ -407,6 +407,24 @@ static inline void napi_enable(struct na
> clear_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +/**
> + * napi_synchronize - wait until NAPI is not running
> + * @n: napi context
> + *
> + * Wait until NAPI is done being scheduled on this context.
> + * Any outstanding processing completes but
> + * does not disable future activations.
> + */
> +static inline void napi_synchronize(const struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> + while (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> + msleep(1);
> +}
> +#else
> +# define napi_synchronize(n) barrier()
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * The DEVICE structure.
> * Actually, this whole structure is a big mistake. It mixes I/O
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
