Yes, that's ok for me. 发自我的 iPhone
在 2014年4月15日，下午7:57，"Sathya Perla" <sathya.pe...@emulex.com> 写道： >> -----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
