[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3Jk+zNnQ5r9gb60deqCmJT+S07VvL3SipKRYXdxM2kPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 21:26:50 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To: Nikolai Zhubr <zhubr.2@...il.com>
Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek 8139 problem on 486.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 8:32 PM Nikolai Zhubr <zhubr.2@...il.com> wrote:
> 22.06.2021 16:22, Arnd Bergmann:
> irq 8: 02, edge
> irq 9: 02, level
> irq 10: 02, edge
> irq 11: 02, edge
> irq 12: 02, edge
> irq 13: 02, edge
> irq 14: 02, edge
> irq 15: 02, edge
>
> Now connection also works fine with unmodified 8139too driver.
> The percentage of low-level errors stays very small:
>
> RX packets:13953 errors:1 dropped:2 overruns:1 frame:0
> TX packets:37346 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:13 carrier:0
Ok, nice!
> This fix looks really nice. Maybe it is right thing to do.
I'll leave that up to Thomas and Maciej to decide, they should have the
best idea of why the x86 pci-irq code looks the way it does today and
what the possible risk with my patch is.
As I said before, I still think we should also merge the 8139 driver patch,
probably without that loop. It's not great, but I'm much more confident
I understand what that does and that the patched version is better than
the current code.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists