netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [2/4] pollcontroller patch for 2.6.0-test10-bk25-netdrvr-exp1

To: "Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, <prasanna@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [2/4] pollcontroller patch for 2.6.0-test10-bk25-netdrvr-exp1
From: "Feldman, Scott" <scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 13:36:30 -0800
Cc: <mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <suparna@xxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcO6+s2n/YLrRrA9R2aOF4Vb2yga6AAe/gAQ
Thread-topic: [2/4] pollcontroller patch for 2.6.0-test10-bk25-netdrvr-exp1
> For both, as Scott mentioned, they don't look tested under NAPI.  For 
> e100 specifically, there is a spiffy new e100 that would need to be 
> re-diffed and tested against.

Specifically, we need to care about insuring netif_rx is called in the
poll_controller callback, rather than netif_receive_skb.  If you use
netif_receive_skb (NAPI mode), the netdump conversation is one-sided.
tg3.c looks broken in this regard in the 2.6-exp BK tree, BTW.

Additionally, if you have VLANs enabled on the interface, we might need
to care about netif_hwaccell_[rx|receive_skb].  Something tells me all
of the netif_* receive funcs need to handle the netdump conversation.
That would be easier than special casing poll_controller in each driver.
Is someone working on this?

We're working on e100/e1000 patches for the current scheme, so we'll
post these when we've tested the various NAPI/VLAN combinations.

-scott


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