From: chas williams <chas@locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:05:41 -0400
true. however, i think i would like to do both at once. but it seems
like just replacing atm_dev_lock with rtnl would probably be enough
for right now.
You still need to have a spinlock to guard the actual insert/delete
from the list so that readers don't see inconsistent data.
Really, look at how netdevices are managed, searched, etc.
>Ok, I'll apply this. But long term we really need to clean out
>the cobwebs here, use RTNL, do solid module refcounting etc.
are you referring to the other bits of linux-atm like br2684, lane,
mpoa, pppoatm or something else?
The whole ATM stack needs to be doing sane things in this area, yes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:25 EST