[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down
From: Colin Leroy <colin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:06:10 +0200
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041007214505.GB31558@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20041006232544.53615761@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041006214322.GG31237@xxxxxxxxx> <20041007075319.6b31430d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041006234912.66bfbdcc.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041007160532.60c3f26b@pirandello> <20041007112846.5c85b2d9.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041007224422.1c1bea95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041007214505.GB31558@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On 07 Oct 2004 at 23h10, Andi Kleen wrote:


> > This patch should do that. It works OK for me, but I'd like it
> > checked before sent upstream...
> > 
> > However, it doesn't fix the hang. it looks like this hang is really
> > coming from sungem.
> IMHO it's not needed. Taking xmit_lock is harmless even when
> the NETIF_F_LLTX flag is set. 

Should that be completely dropped, or is it still ok ? (I think
differenciating action based on hard_start_xmit status, that is, don't
goto repeat undefinitely when NETDEV_TX_BUSY, could be a good idea).
I mean, should I rework that patch, forget about it or leave it as-is?

Concerning the hang, I see that Andrew has put my first patch, the one
checking for netif_carrier_ok(), in his tree. Is it an OK solution from
your (net dev hackers) point of view?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>