[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m3skfmk39q.fsf@intrepid.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:45:21 +0200
From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To: Walt Holman <walt@...mansrus.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Strange network timeouts w/ 2.6.30.5
Walt Holman <walt@...mansrus.com> writes:
> dmesg is attached. This box does have >2GB Ram (6GB total). The dmesg
> will show e100 init'd 3 times since the first is the stock modprobe,
> 2nd was forced with use_io and the 3rd modprobe was after reverting
> the patch.
You most probably can't test without swiotlb (RAM has to be limited to
2 GB or so), can you? That would (dis)prove my theory. Alternatively (or
better), a test on IOMMU-equipped system would do.
Since swiotlb is x86-only thing (though other 64-bit archs may have
something similar), I think the correct work around is to enable the
"for_device" handoff on !X86.
Something like maybe:
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof HaĆasa <khc@...waw.pl>
diff --git a/drivers/net/e100.c b/drivers/net/e100.c
index 014dfb6..b610088 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e100.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e100.c
@@ -1762,9 +1762,12 @@ static int e100_rx_indicate(struct nic *nic, struct rx *rx,
if (ioread8(&nic->csr->scb.status) & rus_no_res)
nic->ru_running = RU_SUSPENDED;
+#ifndef CONFIG_X86
+ /* FIXME interferes with swiotlb. */
pci_dma_sync_single_for_device(nic->pdev, rx->dma_addr,
sizeof(struct rfd),
PCI_DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
+#endif
return -ENODATA;
}
--
Krzysztof Halasa
--
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