On 1/4/07, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 21:06:48 +0100
> On 1/4/07, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've applied that patch, thanks.
>
> David, I suppose you&
On 1/4/07, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've applied that patch, thanks.
David, I suppose you've applied the locking patch as well...
--
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at h
On 12/12/06, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 06:33 +0100, Eric Lemoine wrote:
> On 12/12/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > Anyways, Eric your changes look fine as far as I can tell, can you
> > g
On 12/12/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
Anyways, Eric your changes look fine as far as I can tell, can you
give them a really good testing on some SMP boxes?
Unfortunately I can't, I don't have the hardware (only an old ibook here).
--
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: s
Stephen,
On 12/2/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If transmit lock is contended on, then push return code back
and retry at higher level.
Looking at qdisc_restart, it seems to me that the NETDEV_TX_LOCKED
return code must only be used if the device features LLTX. With your
patc
On 11/28/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:54:40 +0100
> On 11/14/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: "Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
On 11/29/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 09:57:24 +1100
>
> > This looks mostly fine.
> >
> > I was thinking about the lockless stuff, and I wonder if there
> > is a clever way you can get it back down to one PIO
On 11/14/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:11:49 +0100
> +#if GEM_INTERRUPT_LOCKLESS
> +
> +/* Bitmask representing the interrupt conditions that we clear using
GREG_IACK.
> + * We
On 11/10/06, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please use GREG_STAT_* instead of magic constants for the
interrupt mask and ACK register writes. In fact, there are
some questionable values you use, in particular this one:
+static inline void gem_ack_int(struct gem *gp)
+{
+ writel(
ed in the
final patch.
Patch applies to current git net-2.6.
Please review, and test if possible.
Thanks,
Signed-ff-by: Eric Lemoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Eric
sungem-locking.patch
Description: Binary data
On 11/9/06, Michael Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eric Lemoine wrote:
> > On 11/9/06, Michael Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > So it is not possible for tg3_poll() -> tg3_tx() to run any more
> > > after tg3_close() is called.
> >
> > Bu
On 11/9/06, Eric Lemoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/9/06, Michael Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Chan wrote:
>
> > Eric Lemoine wrote:
> >
> > > Instead of tg3_netif_stop() tg3_close() uses netif_stop_queue()
> > > to stop xmit.
On 11/9/06, Michael Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Chan wrote:
> Eric Lemoine wrote:
>
> > Instead of tg3_netif_stop() tg3_close() uses netif_stop_queue()
> > to stop xmit. This doesn't seem right to me. E.g. another CPU
> > in tg3_tx()
> &g
Hi
Instead of tg3_netif_stop() tg3_close() uses netif_stop_queue() to
stop xmit. This doesn't seem right to me. E.g. another CPU in tg3_tx()
could do netif_wake_queue() just after tg3_close() did
netif_stop_queue(). Isn't a bug?
Thanks,
--
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "uns
On 11/6/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006 21:55:20 +0100
"Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/6/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 21:11:34 +0100
> > "Eric Lemoi
On 11/6/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 21:11:34 +0100
"Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 18:52:45 +0100
> > "Eric Lemoi
On 11/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 18:52:45 +0100
"Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 18:28:33 +0100
> > "Eric Lem
On 11/5/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 18:28:33 +0100
"Eric Lemoine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You could also just use net_tx_lock() now.
>
> You mean netif_tx_lock()?
>
> Thanks for letting me know about that
You could also just use net_tx_lock() now.
You mean netif_tx_lock()?
Thanks for letting me know about that function. Yes, I may need it.
tg3 and bnx2 use it to wake up the transmit queue:
if (unlikely(netif_queue_stopped(tp->dev) &&
(tg3_tx_avail(tp) > TG3_TX_WAKEU
On 11/5/06, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 14:00 +0100, Eric Lemoine wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Some (long) time ago benh wrote a blaming comment in sungem.c about
> that driver's locking strategy. That comment basically says that we
&g
Hi!
Some (long) time ago benh wrote a blaming comment in sungem.c about
that driver's locking strategy. That comment basically says that we
probably don't need two spinlocks.
I agree!
Proposal:
Today's sungem effectively uses two spinlock's: "lock" and "tx_lock".
"tx_lock" is held by the xmit
On 8/27/05, Eric Lemoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/27/05, Eric Lemoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/26/05, Geoff Levand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > This fixes a major bug in the Sun GEM Ether
> > > driver's netpoll implementati
On 8/27/05, Eric Lemoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/26/05, Geoff Levand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This fixes a major bug in the Sun GEM Ether
> > driver's netpoll implementation. When both polled
> > and interrupt driven i/o are used simultane
On 8/26/05, Geoff Levand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This fixes a major bug in the Sun GEM Ether
> driver's netpoll implementation. When both polled
> and interrupt driven i/o are used simultaneously,
> for example when using kgdb over Ether with active
> NFS mounts, a condition easily arises whe
24 matches
Mail list logo
