On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 17:35, Roland Dreier wrote: > jamal> How about releasing the qlock only when the LLTX transmit > jamal> lock is grabbed? That should bring it to par with what it > jamal> was originally. > > This seems a little risky. I can't point to a specific deadlock but > it doesn't seem right on general principles to unlock in a different > order than you nested the locks when acquiring them -- if I understand > correctly, you're suggesting lock(queue_lock), lock(tx_lock), > unlock(queue_lock), unlock(tx_lock).
There is no deadlock. Thats exactly how things work. Try the patches i posted. cheers, jamal _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
