[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b25c3fa70712122341q3ba282cdqda3fa56901b14484@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:41:19 +0900
From: "Joonwoo Park" <joonwpark81@...il.com>
To: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
Cc: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, gallatin@...i.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jgarzik@...ox.com, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
"Jesse Brandeburg" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: napi fix
2007/12/13, Kok, Auke <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>:
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@...i.com>
> > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:29:23 -0500
> >
> >> Is the netif_running() check even required?
> >
> > No, it is not.
> >
> > When a device is brought down, one of the first things
> > that happens is that we wait for all pending NAPI polls
> > to complete, then block any new polls from starting.
>
> I think this was previously (pre-2.6.24) not the case, which is why e1000 et al
> has this check as well and that's exactly what is causing most of the
> net_rx_action oopses in the first place. Without the netif_running() check
> previously the drivers were just unusable with NAPI and prone to many races with
> down (i.e. touching some ethtool ioctl which wants to do a reset while routing
> small packets at high numbers). that's why we added the netif_running() check in
> the first place :)
>
> There might be more drivers lurking that need this change...
>
> Auke
>
Also in my case, without netif_running() check, I cannot do ifconfig down.
It stucked if packet generator was sending packets.
Thanks
Joonwoo
--
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