[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080304084024.GA3980@ff.dom.local>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:40:24 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: locking api self-test hanging
On 04-03-2008 06:05, Andrew Morton wrote:
...
>>>> And I've fully bisected this hang twice and both times came up with
>>>>
>>>> commit 33f807ba0d9259e7c75c7a2ce8bd2787e5b540c7
>>>> Author: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
>>>> Date: Mon Nov 19 19:24:52 2007 -0800
>>>>
>>>> [NETPOLL]: Kill NETPOLL_RX_DROP, set but never tested.
>>>>
>>>> which is stupid because that patch doesn't do anything.
...or maybe apparently doesn't do anything?
@@ -128,13 +127,11 @@ static int poll_one_napi(struct netpoll_info *npinfo,
if (!test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &napi->state))
return budget;
- npinfo->rx_flags |= NETPOLL_RX_DROP;
But in a next patch we can see:
@@ -51,12 +50,12 @@ static inline int netpoll_rx(struct sk_buff *skb)
unsigned long flags;
int ret = 0;
- if (!npinfo || (!npinfo->rx_np && !npinfo->rx_flags))
+ if (!npinfo || !npinfo->rx_np)
So, it seems rx_flags could have been tested here for NETPOLL_RX_DROP
yet?
Regards,
Jarek P.
--
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