Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-13 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 07:25:20PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Was it updated per the comments you received on the first posting? I think I addressed everything, yes. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever." signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-12 Thread Jeff Garzik
Mark Brown wrote: This patch against 2.6.14 converts the natsemi driver to use NAPI. It was originally based on one written by Harald Welte, though it has since been modified quite a bit, most extensively in order to remove the ability to disable NAPI since none of the other drivers seem to prov

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-09 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 10:56:19PM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote: > netif_rx_schedule_prep return netif_running(dev) && > dev_close clear_bit(__LINK_STATE_START, &dev->state); Oh, of course - thanks for bearing wth me. Will fix that too and resubmit. -- "You grabbed my hand and we

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-06 Thread Francois Romieu
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : [...] > Prior to waiting dev_close() clears __LINK_STATE_START which will cause > netif_rx_schedule_prep() to return false. > As far as I can see that should prevent the interrupt handler scheduling > any further poll() calls? netif_rx_schedule_prep return netif_ru

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-06 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 01:19:34AM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote: > Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : > > I had been under the impression that the stack was supposed to make sure > > that no poll() is running before the driver close() gets called? > Not exactly. dev_close() waits a bit but it can n

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-05 Thread Francois Romieu
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : [...] > I had been under the impression that the stack was supposed to make sure > that no poll() is running before the driver close() gets called ? Not exactly. dev_close() waits a bit but it can not be sure that the device driver will not schedule ->poll() from i

Re: [PATCH] natsemi: NAPI support

2005-12-05 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 12:12:09AM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote: > -> netif_poll_disable() may sleep while a spinlock is held. So it can, thanks. > Btw, the poll/close routines seem racy with each other. I had been under the impression that the stack was supposed to make sure that no poll() is