> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li, ZhenHua [mailto:zhen-h...@hp.com]
>
> Because netif_running() is called in netif_device_detach and
> netif_device_attach. To avoid dev status changed while
> netif_device_detach/attach is not finished, I think a rtnl_lock and
> unlock should be called to avoid this.
Ok. I'd like to then factor the code slightly differently by using
routines like this:
be_close_sync() {
rtnl_lock();
netif_device_detach(netdev);
if (netif_running(netdev))
be_close(netdev);
rtnl_unlock();
}
and similarly for be_open_sync()
And, I'd need some time to test these flows too.
Would you be OK with this?
thanks,
-Sathya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
