[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100329211115.GA3251@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:11:16 +0200
From: François Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, timo.teras@....fi,
ivecera@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] r8169: fix broken register writes
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> :
[...]
> FWIW, XID18000000 here (J7F4) loses MAC4 on shutdown; hadn't tested the patch
> yet. 2.6.26 (on that box) and 2.6.31 (on identical mb) work, 2.6.33 doesn't.
> I suspect that bisect would lead to commit cc098dc70 (i.e. the place where we
> started to set address on shutdown). One more data point: ifconfig hw ether
> done under 2.6.26 did restore the address. And that's the same function,
> isn't it?
You are right.
> Another interesting bit: unlike the older kernel, grep for eth0 in .33 dmesg
>
> eth0: RTL8169sc/8110sc at 0xf87fc000, 00:30:18:a4:65:89, XID 18000000 IRQ 18
> r8169: eth0: link down
> ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth0: link is not ready
> r8169: eth0: link up
> ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth0: link becomes ready
Remove rtl8169scd_hw_phy_config ?
[...]
> Same for .31 on another box, modulo different address there...
No, keep it.
At first sight it looks like rtl8169_open::rtl8169_check_link_status and
a LinkChg interrupt (order eventually reversed) while 2.6.26 did not
notice the interrupt.
--
Ueimor
--
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