[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071107171538.1802487c@freepuppy.rosehill>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:15:38 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
Cc: Linas Vepstas <linas@...tin.ibm.com>, wenxiong@...ibm.com,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
john.ronciak@...el.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: e1000: avoid lockup durig error recovery
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:45:18 -0800
"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com> wrote:
> [adding netdev, jeff G to the Cc]
>
> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:50:17PM -0800, Kok, Auke wrote:
> >> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> >>> If a PCI bus error is encountered during device open, the
> >>> error recovery routines will attempt to close the device.
> >>> If napi has not yet been enabled, the napi disable in the
> >>> close will hang.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Linas Vepstas <linas@...tin.ibm.com>
> >>>
> >>> ----
> >>> The "elegence" of this solution is arguable: one could
> >>> say its "better" to perform this check in e1000_down().
> >>> However, doing so will disrupt a commonly used path,
> >>> whereas here, the hack is in the infrequently used
> >>> error path, and thus less intrusive.
> >>>
Same problem might be possible in suspend/resume.
The problem with testing napi_enabled is that state can get changed
by racing irq.
--
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
-
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