PERFORCE change 91042 for review

[John Baldwin]

On Saturday 04 February 2006 04:03, Warner Losh wrote:
> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=91042
>
> Change 91042 by imp at imp_plunger on 2006/02/04 09:02:46
>
> 	Fix spelling error
> 	Move locking to avoid nesting the locking and to give the locking a
> 	smaller scope.

You shouldn't have a LOR with the IF_ADDR_LOCK unless you have some LOR 
somewhere else.  I used a rather simple version of locking for nic drivers 
where the lock was basically held for all of foo_start(), foo_init(), the 
ISR, etc.

-- 
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org