[REVIEW/TEST] polling(4) changes

[dima]

> d> Seems to be a first considerable step regarding the ideas discussed in March :)
> d> But, my idea about the separate locking of each interface dissappeared from this implementation. mtx_poll is good to protect the pollrec array and other sensitive variables. But we could get advantage of SMP machines writing polling loops like this:
> d> 
> d> for( i = 0; i < poll_handlers; ++i ) {
> d>   mtx_lock( &iface_lock[i] );
> d>   pr[i].handler(pr[i].ifp, POLL_ONLY, count);
> d>   mtx_unlock( &iface_lock[i] );
> d> }
> 
> What is the benefit here? The driver must have its own lock.

Well, consider the absense of the mtx_poll lock:

- mtx_lock( &mtx_poll );
  for( i = 0; i < poll_handlers; ++i ) {
+   mtx_lock( &iface_lock[i] );
    pr[i].handler( pr[i].ifp, POLL_ONLY, count );
+   mtx_unlock( &iface_lock[i] );
  }
- mtx_unlock( &mtx_poll );

So, several kernel threads in an SMP machine can poll different interfaces simultaneously. And mtx_lock should only be used in ether_poll_[de]register().