Re: Network Stack Locking
From: Harti Brandt (harti_at_freebsd.org)
Date: 05/24/04
- Previous message: Garance A Drosihn: "Change to "kludge option processing" in /bin/ps"
- In reply to: Robert Watson: "Network Stack Locking"
- Next in thread: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: Network Stack Locking"
- Reply: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: Network Stack Locking"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 11:08:13 +0200 (MET DST) To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Robert Watson wrote:
RW>- ATM -- Harti? :-)
Sure. At least netnatm, netgraph/atm and the various drivers. At one
point I want to get rid of netatm, so I don't want to put effort into
netatm (just keep it working and compliling).
netgraph/atm should be clean to the point as netgraph in general is clean
(with regards to locking). The drivers (en, [pfh]atm) also are locked,
but I'll probably do another iteration when I get my working environment
back (I'm currently moving from Berlin to Munich).
RW>- Network device drivers -- some have locking, some have correct locking,
RW> some have potential interactions with other pieces of the system (such
RW> as the USB stack). Note that for a driver to work correctly with a
RW> Giant-free system, it must be safe to invoke ifp->if_start() without
RW> holding Giant, and for if_start() to be aware that it cannot
RW> acquire Giant without generating a lock order issue. It's OK for
RW> if_input() to be called with Giant, although undesirable generally.
RW> Some drivers also have locking that is commented out by default due to
RW> use of recursive locks, but I'm not sure this is necessarily sufficient
RW> problem not to just turn on the locking.
Is there anybody working on the interaction between the network drivers
and the module loader (race condition between the interrupt handler and
xxx_detach())?
harti
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Garance A Drosihn: "Change to "kludge option processing" in /bin/ps"
- In reply to: Robert Watson: "Network Stack Locking"
- Next in thread: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: Network Stack Locking"
- Reply: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: Network Stack Locking"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
- Re: Network Stack Locking
... netgraph/atm and the various drivers. ... > point I want to get rid
of netatm, so I don't want to put effort into ... > netatm. ... (freebsd-arch) - Re: New != Faster
... My detailed measurements of disk performance and those of others I am ... I/O
and filesystem I/O. ... all now SMP-safe or do some still live under GIANT? ...
There are still some storage drivers in 6.x that are giant-locked. ... (freebsd-questions) - Re: HEADS UP: network locking work going on
... > Is there any consideration for running some hardware drivers with Giant ...
I have seen no issues so far mixing drivers w/ and w/o Giant. ... (freebsd-arch) - Re: HEADS UP: network locking work going on
... > Is there any consideration for running some hardware drivers with Giant ...
I have seen no issues so far mixing drivers w/ and w/o Giant. ... (freebsd-net)