On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:11:47PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Rogier Wolff a écrit :
> >On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:43:49PM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote:
> >>The system only recovers after the Netdev watchdog found out that the
> >>transmit timed out. However, the e1000 register dump starts about 4 to
> >>5 seconds earlier: a possible workaround would be to trigger the
> >>timeout code path as soon as the register dump starts.
> >
> >Found a typo.
> >
> > Roger.
> >
> >
> >--- e1000_main.c.orig 2006-01-11 14:53:23.000000000 +0100
> >+++ e1000_main.c 2006-01-11 14:53:38.000000000 +0100
> >@@ -3449,7 +3449,7 @@
> > }
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < E1000_MAX_INTR; i++)
> >- if (unlikely(!adapter->clean_rx(adapter, adapter->rx_ring) &
> >+ if (unlikely(!adapter->clean_rx(adapter, adapter->rx_ring) &&
> > !e1000_clean_tx_irq(adapter, adapter->tx_ring)))
> > break;
> >
> >
> >
>
> I believe it's not a typo.
>
> The intention is to call both clean_rx() and e1000_clean_tx_irq(), and
> break of the loop if both said : There was no job pending.
Although (one of) the prototypes state(s) that it returns a boolean,
it is valid C to return the number of items pending.
And if one reports "2 more pending" and the other reports "1 more
pending", the "&" between the two becomes 2 & 1 => 0 / FALSE, while 2
&& 1 => TRUE.
I consider this a low prio typo, not likely to be a bug "right now",
but it is inviting someone to make it into a bug later on.
Roger.
--
+-- Rogier Wolff -- www.harddisk-recovery.nl -- 0800 220 20 20 --
| Files foetsie, bestanden kwijt, alle data weg?!
| Blijf kalm en neem contact op met Harddisk-recovery.nl!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
