[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1354134001.2768.11.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:20:01 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Sathya Perla <sathya.perla@...lex.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] be2net: fix INTx ISR for interrupt behaviour
on BE2
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 11:20 +0530, Sathya Perla wrote:
> On BE2 chip, an interrupt may be raised even when EQ is in un-armed state.
> As a result be_intx()::events_get() and be_poll:events_get() can race and
> notify an EQ wrongly.
>
> Fix this by counting events only in be_poll(). Commit 0b545a629 fixes
> the same issue in the MSI-x path.
>
> But, on Lancer, INTx can be de-asserted only by notifying num evts. This
> is not an issue as the above BE2 behavior doesn't exist/has never been
> seen on Lancer.
[...]
> @@ -2014,15 +1996,23 @@ static int be_rx_cqs_create(struct be_adapter *adapter)
>
> static irqreturn_t be_intx(int irq, void *dev)
> {
> - struct be_adapter *adapter = dev;
> - int num_evts;
> + struct be_eq_obj *eqo = dev;
> + struct be_adapter *adapter = eqo->adapter;
> + int num_evts = 0;
>
> - /* With INTx only one EQ is used */
> - num_evts = event_handle(&adapter->eq_obj[0]);
> - if (num_evts)
> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
> - else
> - return IRQ_NONE;
> + /* On Lancer, clear-intr bit of the EQ DB does not work.
> + * INTx is de-asserted only on notifying num evts.
> + */
> + if (lancer_chip(adapter))
> + num_evts = events_get(eqo);
> +
> + /* The EQ-notify may not de-assert INTx rightaway, causing
> + * the ISR to be invoked again. So, return HANDLED even when
> + * num_evts is zero.
> + */
> + be_eq_notify(adapter, eqo->q.id, false, true, num_evts);
> + napi_schedule(&eqo->napi);
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
[...]
You shouldn't unconditionally return IRQ_HANDLED. This prevents
interrupt storm detection from working, not just for your device but for
anything else sharing its IRQ.
I understand there is a real problem to be fixed (PCIe write completions
overtaking INTx deassertion, and maybe a specific hardware bug). The
way we dealt with such problems in sfc is to count the number of times
in a row that we don't see any events, and only return IRQ_HANDLED the
first time.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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