[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <061C8A8601E8EE4CA8D8FD6990CEA891188439E0@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 23:22:31 +0000
From: "Dave, Tushar N" <tushar.n.dave@...el.com>
To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
"Wyborny, Carolyn" <carolyn.wyborny@...el.com>,
"Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
"Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
"Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>,
Dean Nelson <dnelson@...hat.com>,
"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] e1000: Reset rx ring index on receive overrun
I am interested in to see if you have actual test case and more importantly test data that shows that kernel and device indexes are not synchronized any more.
-Tushar
>-----Original Message-----
>From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org]
>On Behalf Of Samuel Thibault
>Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:02 PM
>To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Brandeburg, Jesse; Allan, Bruce W; Wyborny,
>Carolyn; Skidmore, Donald C; Rose, Gregory V; Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P;
>Duyck, Alexander H; Ronciak, John; David S. Miller; Jiri Pirko; Dean
>Nelson; e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net; netdev@...r.kernel.org
>Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>Subject: [PATCH] e1000: Reset rx ring index on receive overrun
>
>At high traffic rate, the rx ring may get completely filled before we
>manage to consume it. After it is filled, the kernel and device indexes
>are not synchronized any more, so we have to reset them, otherwise the
>kernel will be stuck waiting for the wrong slot to be filled.
>
>Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>
>
>---
>This is just a patch suggestion, I'm not an expert in network drivers, I
>leave to actual driver authors to bake a better version.
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
>b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
>index 37caa88..77c8dbc 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
>@@ -3759,6 +3759,21 @@ static irqreturn_t e1000_intr(int irq, void *data)
> if (unlikely(test_bit(__E1000_DOWN, &adapter->flags)))
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>
>+ if (unlikely(icr & E1000_ICR_RXO)) {
>+ /* Receive Overrun */
>+ u32 rctl;
>+ int i;
>+ rctl = er32(RCTL);
>+ ew32(RCTL, rctl & ~E1000_RCTL_EN);
>+ for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_rx_queues; i++) {
>+ memset(adapter->rx_ring[i].desc, 0, adapter-
>>rx_ring[i].size);
>+ adapter->rx_ring[i].next_to_clean = 0;
>+ }
>+ ew32(RDH, 0);
>+ ew32(RCTL, rctl);
>+ adapter->netdev->stats.rx_fifo_errors++;
>+ }
>+
> if (unlikely(icr & (E1000_ICR_RXSEQ | E1000_ICR_LSC))) {
> hw->get_link_status = 1;
> /* guard against interrupt when we're going down */
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the
>body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at
>http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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