| To: | Colin Leroy <colin@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:45:05 +0200 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20041007224422.1c1bea95@jack.colino.net> |
| References: | <20041006232544.53615761@jack.colino.net> <20041006214322.GG31237@waste.org> <20041007075319.6b31430d@jack.colino.net> <20041006234912.66bfbdcc.davem@davemloft.net> <20041007160532.60c3f26b@pirandello> <20041007112846.5c85b2d9.davem@davemloft.net> <20041007224422.1c1bea95@jack.colino.net> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:44:22PM +0200, Colin Leroy wrote: > On 07 Oct 2004 at 11h10, David S. Miller wrote: > > Hi again, > > > So, netpoll needs to have the NETIF_F_LLTX stuff added to it. > > 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. (or at least it was with my original patchkit. In theory it's possible someone changed their driver to take xmit_lock in hard_start_xmit, but if they did that I would just consider it a driver bug) The only drawback is that there won't be a reply when the driver try lock fails, but netpoll doesn't have a queue for that anyways. You could probably poll then, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down, Colin Leroy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 2.6.7 tulip performance (with NAPI), Ben Greear |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down, Colin Leroy |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down, Matt Mackall |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |