[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <471665D7.5020607@colorfullife.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:43:19 +0200
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
CC: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>,
nedev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: MSI interrupts and disable_irq
Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> Correct, but the overall point was that MSI-X conceptually conflicts
>> with the existing "lockless" disable_irq() schedule, which was written
>> when there was a one-one relationship between irq, PCI device, and work
>> to be done.
>>
>
> at this point, nic in mcp55 is using msi or INTx.
>
>
Correct.
For msi-x, the driver does three disable_irq() calls to the correct
vectors. ugly, but nevertheless correct.
The bug only affected msi: The driver did disable_irq(<old INTx irq
num>) instead of disable_irq(<new msi-x irq num>).
The patch that I've attached to the bugzilla report 9047 seems to fix
the crash, thus I would propose to apply it to 2.6.23 and 2.6.24. I'll
send a seperate mail.
All other problem [reduce code duplication, less ugly locking, ...]
should be fixed with independant patches.
--
Manfred
> YH
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists