[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070508.232211.88475000.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 23:22:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linkwatch bustage in git-net
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 23:11:43 -0700
> On Wed, 9 May 2007 15:45:58 +1000 Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:31:55PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > >
> > > Hmm, I don't see it here (probably because we use different NICs).
> > > But does this help?
> >
> > Thinking about it again I don't think it will help you because if your
> > carrier started out as off then it would've been considered an urgent
> > event anyway.
> >
> > So what NIC are you using? And where abouts in the boot process is it
> > hanging? For exmaple, is it hanging when obtaining a DHCP address?
> >
> > In any case, this patch can't hurt. So here's one with a changelog:
> >
> > [NET] link_watch: Eliminate potential delay on wrap-around
>
> hm, that fixed it. Do we know why? ;)
I wonder if, because of how we initialize jiffies on bootup to find
wraparound bugs, urgent_event is always true.
If it is always true, linkwatch_nextevent will never get updated.
Herbert's patch indirectly corrects that.
In the mean time I'll stick Herbert's patch into net-2.6
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists