[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.5.54] hermes: serialization fixes
Stephen Evanchik <> writes:

> On Friday 03 January 2003 12:47, you wrote:
> | Why not put the spinlock/unlock inside hermes_bap_seek()? Smaller, better
> | contained and more readable.
> That's the better solution, I'm trying to coordinate a bit with the
> maintainer. The only reason I didn't do this in the first place is because
> there is a (possibly unecessary) delay loop inside hermes_bap_seek that I
> believe is trying to combat the same problem. I'm awaiting a response from
> the maintainer since he knows a bit more about the hardware than I do.

There is something not quite right about this patch. I used have a ton
of errors in my logs, and this patch seemed to clear this out nicely.

When I run with a patched driver now, I run for about 20 minutes with
various loads and sudenly the ksoftirqd_CPU0 process starts to hog my
CPU and not wanting to let go. As soon as I pull out the card, the
load returns to normal.

Is there any way I can provide more details on what is happening?

> Stephen

Alexander Hoogerhuis |
CCNP - CCDP - MCNE - CCSE | +47 908 21 485
"You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it." --Scott McNealy
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.049 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site