On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 11:43:11PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 02:49:05PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > R> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > R> > R> >On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 03:57:58AM +0000, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > R> >P> yongari 2006-07-20 03:57:58 UTC > R> >P> > R> >P> FreeBSD src repository > R> >P> > R> >P> Modified files: > R> >P> sys/dev/em if_em.c > R> >P> Log: > R> >P> Honor IFF_DRV_OACTIVE in em_start_locked(). > R> > > R> >Isn't it better to shift this change to the em_start(), to avoid double > R> >check of IFF_DRV_RUNNING? Or may be just merge em_start_locked() into > the > R> >em_start()? > R> > R> Isn't em_start_locked() called from quite a few different places, > including > R> the interrupt handler, etc, where the mutex is already held? > > It is, so the latter idea won't work. However, in all these places > we can know the status of IFF_DRV_OACTIVE before calling the start > routine. >
You're right. Feel free to fix it. I have to solve re(4) issues on sparc64 at the moment... -- Regards, Pyun YongHyeon _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
