From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 16 13:11:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3725037B405 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F49243FD7 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:11:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 7539 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 20:11:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 16 Apr 2003 20:11:33 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3GKBMOv073188; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:11:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20030416183846.GA41630@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:11:24 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: John Hay cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/wl if_wl.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:11:27 -0000 On 16-Apr-2003 John Hay wrote: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 02:06:25PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> On 16-Apr-2003 John Hay wrote: >> > jhay 2003/04/16 10:42:38 PDT >> > >> > FreeBSD src repository >> > >> > Modified files: >> > sys/dev/wl if_wl.c >> > Log: >> > Add locking and remove all the spl() calls. >> >> Note that some of the spl calls covered structures other than >> just the softc. I'd prefer that we leave spl calls in until >> all the structures they cover are locked. > > Ok, should I put them all back? Or just the ones being used as > interrupt disablers? And what about the places where there > should have been splx()es but weren't? I would put back any spl's covering things not covered by the locks you added. :) Adding in missing spl's is not necessarily required, so doing or not doing that is your choice. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/