[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1393975344.4632.10.camel@LTIRV-MCHAN1.corp.ad.broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 15:22:23 -0800
From: Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>
To: Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@...il.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Nithin Nayak Sujir <nsujir@...adcom.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: sblk->status_tag on drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c
On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 23:25 +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> From the comments in ISR any non-zero value to intr-mbox-0 clear
> the interrupt ie write status as 1 so I assume interrupt is clear and then
> in tg3_int_reenable is going to write 0x0 on to intr-mbox-0
> which again reenables the interrupt, was my guess is true?
Yes, the (last_tag << 24) is also written to the intr-mbox-0 to
acknowledge the status block.
> And sblk->status_tag is always 0 in ISR and BH(poll) why is that so?
> If it's is 1(unsigned non-zero) then possibly tg3_int_reenable will write
> non-zero value on intr-mbox-0 which will clear the interrupt.
You should print out the entire status block. It shouldn't be zero.
The status tag should be incrementing for each interrupt.
>
> Request for any help who updates sblk->status_tag value and
> how many time the ISR in PCIe RC and ISR in EP will call for link up?
>
>
If you are expecting link up, the first 32-bit word of the status block
should have bit 1 set (bit 0 should also be set). I think the driver is
not seeing the status block correctly, so it is not acknowledging the
link change interrupt and the status_tag.
--
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