Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:15:00 +0200 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Giuseppe Lettieri <g.lettieri@iet.unipi.it>, Bryan Venteicher <bryanv@daemoninthecloset.org>, current@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [net] protecting interfaces from races between control and data ? Message-ID: <CA%2BhQ2%2BhuoCCweq7fjoYmH3nyhmhb5DzukEdPSMtaJEWa8Ft0JQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmokT6YKPR7CXsoCavEmWv3W8urZu4eBVgKWaj9iMaVJFZg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20130805082307.GA35162@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <2034715395.855.1375714772487.JavaMail.root@daemoninthecloset.org> <CAJ-VmokT6YKPR7CXsoCavEmWv3W8urZu4eBVgKWaj9iMaVJFZg@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 5 August 2013 07:59, Bryan Venteicher <bryanv@daemoninthecloset.org> > wrote: > > > What I've done in my drivers is: > > * Lock the core mutex > > * Clear IFF_DRV_RUNNING > > * Lock/unlock each queue's lock > > .. and I think that's the only sane way of doing it. > yeah, this was also the solution we had in mind, i was surprised not find this pattern in the drivers i have looked at. Also there are drivers (chelsio ?) which do not seem to have locks on the receive interrupt handlers ? Does anyone know how linux copes with the same problem ? They seem to have an rtnl_lock() which is a global lock for all configuration of netdevices (would replace our per-interface 'core lock' above), but i am totally unclear on how individual tx threads and interrupt handlers acknowledge that they have read the change in status. cheers luigihelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BhQ2%2BhuoCCweq7fjoYmH3nyhmhb5DzukEdPSMtaJEWa8Ft0JQ>