Re: b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend)

Gary Zambrano
2007-05-29T15:37:30Z

On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 16:55 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Monday 28 May 2007 16:12:12 Maximilian Engelhardt wrote:
> > On Monday 28 May 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > Can you also test the following patch?
> > > I think there's a bug in b44 that is doesn't properly discard
> > > shared IRQs, so it might possibly generate a NAPI storm, dunno.
> > > Worth a try.
> > >
> > > Index: linux-2.6.22-rc3/drivers/net/b44.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.22-rc3.orig/drivers/net/b44.c 2007-05-27 23:01:44.000000000
> > > +0200 +++ linux-2.6.22-rc3/drivers/net/b44.c 2007-05-28 12:48:27.000000000
> > > +0200 @@ -911,6 +911,8 @@ static irqreturn_t b44_interrupt(int irq
> > > spin_lock(&bp->lock);
> > >
> > > istat = br32(bp, B44_ISTAT);
> > > + if (istat == 0xFFFFFFFF)
> > > + goto out; /* Shared IRQ not for us */
> > > imask = br32(bp, B44_IMASK);
> > >
> > > /* The interrupt mask register controls which interrupt bits
> > > @@ -942,6 +944,7 @@ irq_ack:
> > > bw32(bp, B44_ISTAT, istat);
> > > br32(bp, B44_ISTAT);
> > > }
> > > +out:
> > > spin_unlock(&bp->lock);
> > > return IRQ_RETVAL(handled);
> > > }
> >
> > I did try this patch on a affected kernel, but I didn't notice any big
> > difference. Perhaps the kernel is a bit less slow during the test, but It's
> > hard to tell.
>
> Ok, but anyway. I think this is a bug and needs to be fixed this way. Gary?
>

Thanks Michael.
No, I don't think this is a bug and it does not need to be fixed.
Thanks,
Gary