From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@myri.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: joonwpark81@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: napi fix
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:29:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47601A73.5010804@myri.com> (raw)
[I apologize for loosing threading, I'm replying from the archives]
> The problem is that the driver is doing a NAPI completion and
> re-enabling chip interrupts with work_done == weight, and that is
> illegal.
The only time at least myri10ge will do this is due to
the !netif_running(netdev) check. Eg, from myri10ge's poll:
work_done = myri10ge_clean_rx_done(mgp, budget);
if (work_done < budget || !netif_running(netdev)) {
netif_rx_complete(netdev, napi);
put_be32(htonl(3), mgp->irq_claim);
}
Is the netif_running() check even required? Is this just
a bad way to solve a race with running NAPI at down() time
that would be better solved by putting a napi_synchronize()
in the driver's down() routine?
I'd rather fix this right than add another check to a
questionable code path.
Thanks,
Drew
next reply other threads:[~2007-12-12 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-12 17:29 Andrew Gallatin [this message]
2007-12-12 17:38 ` [RFC] net: napi fix David Miller
2007-12-12 17:40 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-12 18:41 ` Kok, Auke
2007-12-13 7:41 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-13 14:13 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-13 14:19 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 16:45 ` Kok, Auke
2007-12-13 18:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 19:02 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-13 19:09 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 19:35 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 20:38 ` David Miller
2007-12-14 2:06 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-13 13:49 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 13:50 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 14:14 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 20:16 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 20:41 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 21:55 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 22:28 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 22:34 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 22:58 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-20 9:52 ` Robert Olsson
2007-12-20 11:22 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-12 4:01 [PATCH 6/7] [NETDEV]: tehuti Fix possible causing oops of net_rx_action Joonwoo Park
2007-12-12 5:39 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-12 5:46 ` [RFC] net: napi fix Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-12 6:05 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-12 15:22 ` David Miller
2007-12-12 15:21 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47601A73.5010804@myri.com \
--to=gallatin@myri.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=joonwpark81@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.