[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071211233909.GA22470@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:39:09 -0500
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: delay via-rhine irq initialisation.
With CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ set, via-rhine complains during init.
(See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=377721 for a report).
Does this diff look right?
(I don't have a via-rhine handy to test with)
We may be able to get away with moving the request_irq to just after the
alloc_tbufs(), but I feel if a real interrupt occured, this diff would
stand more chance of doing the right thing.
Comments?
Dave
Delay irq registration until after we've allocated ring buffers,
otherwise DEBUG_SHIRQ will complain.
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/net/via-rhine.c b/drivers/net/via-rhine.c
index 07263cd..37b3efb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/via-rhine.c
+++ b/drivers/net/via-rhine.c
@@ -1151,24 +1151,28 @@ static int rhine_open(struct net_device *dev)
void __iomem *ioaddr = rp->base;
int rc;
- rc = request_irq(rp->pdev->irq, &rhine_interrupt, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name,
- dev);
- if (rc)
- return rc;
-
if (debug > 1)
printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: rhine_open() irq %d.\n",
dev->name, rp->pdev->irq);
rc = alloc_ring(dev);
- if (rc) {
- free_irq(rp->pdev->irq, dev);
+ if (rc)
return rc;
- }
+
alloc_rbufs(dev);
alloc_tbufs(dev);
rhine_chip_reset(dev);
init_registers(dev);
+
+ rc = request_irq(rp->pdev->irq, &rhine_interrupt, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name,
+ dev);
+ if (rc) {
+ free_rbufs(dev);
+ free_tbufs(dev);
+ free_ring(dev);
+ return rc;
+ }
+
if (debug > 2)
printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: Done rhine_open(), status %4.4x "
"MII status: %4.4x.\n",
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
--
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