[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKgT0Udv7q-fENNAwGToaVZDiaH1GE9kQhe9HqrPGZnXfFC7bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 10:44:41 -0800
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v2 08/11] fbnic: Cleanup handling for link down
event statistics
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:49 AM Russell King (Oracle)
<linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 09:00:54AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > @@ -86,10 +86,10 @@ static int fbnic_stop(struct net_device *netdev)
> > {
> > struct fbnic_net *fbn = netdev_priv(netdev);
> >
> > + fbnic_mac_free_irq(fbn->fbd);
> > phylink_suspend(fbn->phylink, fbnic_bmc_present(fbn->fbd));
> >
> > fbnic_down(fbn);
> > - fbnic_mac_free_irq(fbn->fbd);
>
> This change makes no sense to me, and doesn't seem to be described in
> the commit message.
It was mostly about just disabling the IRQ before we tear down the
link in the non-BMC case. Otherwise we run the risk of an interrupt
firing to indicate that the link is down and incrementing the
link_down_event counter when we do an ifconfig down and the link was
intended to be torn down.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists