On 09/01/19(Wed) 10:11, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 23/12/18(Sun) 14:41, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Using SLIST() instead of TAILQ() is a step towards using lock-less
> > lists.
> >
> > As found in my previous attempts the interface list cannot be protected
> > by a mutex as long a if_enqueue()
On 23/12/18(Sun) 14:41, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Using SLIST() instead of TAILQ() is a step towards using lock-less
> lists.
>
> As found in my previous attempts the interface list cannot be protected
> by a mutex as long a if_enqueue() might grab the KERNEL_LOCK(). So I'm
> heading towards
Using SLIST() instead of TAILQ() is a step towards using lock-less
lists.
As found in my previous attempts the interface list cannot be protected
by a mutex as long a if_enqueue() might grab the KERNEL_LOCK(). So I'm
heading towards using SRPL_*().
Ok?
Index: net/if_bridge.c
