Re: trunk(4) vs splnet

2017-05-27 Thread Alexandr Nedvedicky
Hello, On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 08:45:31PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 27/05/17(Sat) 17:33, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 04:54:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > The global list of softc is *not* accessed in the input path, so it > > > doesn't

Re: trunk(4) vs splnet

2017-05-27 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 27/05/17(Sat) 17:33, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 04:54:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > The global list of softc is *not* accessed in the input path, so it > > doesn't need splnet(). > > > > ioctl(2) handlers are already executed with the NET_LOCK() he

Re: trunk(4) vs splnet

2017-05-27 Thread Alexandr Nedvedicky
Hello, On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 04:54:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > The global list of softc is *not* accessed in the input path, so it > doesn't need splnet(). > > ioctl(2) handlers are already executed with the NET_LOCK() held, so > splnet() is superfluous. changes look good to me, but s

trunk(4) vs splnet

2017-05-26 Thread Martin Pieuchot
The global list of softc is *not* accessed in the input path, so it doesn't need splnet(). ioctl(2) handlers are already executed with the NET_LOCK() held, so splnet() is superfluous. ok? Index: net/if_trunk.c === RCS file: /cvs/src