lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.6.20->2.6.21 - networking dies after random time

    * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

    > thanks for tracking it down! Could you try the patch below (ontop an
    > otherwise unmodified kernel)? This tests the theory whether the
    > problem is related to the disable_irq_nosync() call in the ne2k
    > driver's xmit path. Does this solve the hangs too?

    please try the patch below instead.

    Ingo

    Index: linux/kernel/irq/chip.c
    ===================================================================
    --- linux.orig/kernel/irq/chip.c
    +++ linux/kernel/irq/chip.c
    @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ static void default_enable(unsigned int
    /*
    * default disable function
    */
    -static void default_disable(unsigned int irq)
    +void default_disable(unsigned int irq)
    {
    }

    Index: linux/kernel/irq/internals.h
    ===================================================================
    --- linux.orig/kernel/irq/internals.h
    +++ linux/kernel/irq/internals.h
    @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ extern void irq_chip_set_defaults(struct
    /* Set default handler: */
    extern void compat_irq_chip_set_default_handler(struct irq_desc *desc);

    +extern void default_disable(unsigned int irq);
    +
    #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
    extern void register_irq_proc(unsigned int irq);
    extern void register_handler_proc(unsigned int irq, struct irqaction *action);
    Index: linux/kernel/irq/manage.c
    ===================================================================
    --- linux.orig/kernel/irq/manage.c
    +++ linux/kernel/irq/manage.c
    @@ -102,7 +102,19 @@ void disable_irq_nosync(unsigned int irq
    spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags);
    if (!desc->depth++) {
    desc->status |= IRQ_DISABLED;
    - desc->chip->disable(irq);
    + /*
    + * the _nosync variant of irq-disable suggests that the
    + * caller is not worried about concurrency but about the
    + * ordering of the irq flow itself. (such as hardware
    + * getting confused about certain, normally valid irq
    + * handling sequences.) So if the default disable handler
    + * is in place then try the more conservative masking
    + * instead:
    + */
    + if (desc->chip->disable == default_disable && desc->chip->mask)
    + desc->chip->mask(irq);
    + else
    + desc->chip->disable(irq);
    }
    spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
    }
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-07-24 11:45    [W:2.515 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site