From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May  5 13:28:49 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AA7F337B401; Mon,  5 May 2003 13:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c18609.belrs1.nsw.optusnet.com.au
	[210.49.80.204])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3C40B43F3F; Mon,  5 May 2003 13:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from peterjeremy@optushome.com.au)
Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au
	[127.0.0.1])h45KSkp9002581;	Tue, 6 May 2003 06:28:46 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from jeremyp@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au)
Received: (from jeremyp@localhost)
	by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h45KSiJG002580;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 06:28:44 +1000 (EST)
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 06:28:44 +1000
From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
To: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
Message-ID: <20030505202844.GA972@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
References: <3EA9D8E1.2090307@btc.adaptec.com>
	<Pine.BSF.4.21.0304251813300.66142-100000@root.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304251813300.66142-100000@root.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org
cc: src-committers@freebsd.org
cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 20:28:50 -0000

On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 06:24:08PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote:
>I have run various versions of the patch for about 3 weeks and the final
>version with no changes for about a week, all without Giant.  The reason
>why I did not see ifnet problems even though I processed ~400M packets was
>because all ifnet processing happened to be with the fxp lock held and my
>laptop only had one network interface.  This is not an intentional part of
>the patch; it is not an attempt to protect ifnet with a local fxp lock!  

What about the loopback interface (and maybe other virtual interfaces)?
Do you have lo0 disabled or does something else protect it?

Peter