Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 06:28:44 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h Message-ID: <20030505202844.GA972@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304251813300.66142-100000@root.org> References: <3EA9D8E1.2090307@btc.adaptec.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304251813300.66142-100000@root.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
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? Peterhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030505202844.GA972>