From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@broadcom.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: joachim.deguara@amd.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com,
"netdev" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] tg3 dead after s2ram
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:38:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1186097880.18322.73.camel@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070802.150636.77057800.davem@davemloft.net>
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 15:06 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@broadcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 12:10:29 -0700
>
> > Alternatively, we can also fix it by calling pci_enable_device() again
> > in tg3_open(). But I think it is better to just always save and restore
> > in suspend/resume. bnx2.c will also require the same fix.
>
> We could do it that way. But don't you think it's more reliable to
> save and restore around the event we know will be what clobbers the
> PCI config space on us? :-)
>
Yes for sure when netif state is running and we were already doing that.
> Other things might happen between ->resume() and ->open() that could
> modify PCI config space, and we could overwrite such changes if we do
> the PCI restore in ->open().
I suggested calling pci_enable_device() in ->open(), not calling
pci_restore_state() in ->open(). I ultimately decided against it
because some devices do not enable memory as a workaround and it would
be messy to deal with it again in tg3_open().
I definitely agree that calling PCI restore in ->open() is a bad idea.
We used to save PCI state in ->probe() once and restore PCI state after
every chip reset. This sequence caused many subtle problems.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-02 22:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200707311128.32528.joachim.deguara@amd.com>
2007-08-01 0:45 ` [REGRESSION] tg3 dead after s2ram Andrew Morton
2007-08-01 7:53 ` Michael Chan
2007-08-01 8:01 ` Joachim Deguara
2007-08-01 17:47 ` Michael Chan
2007-08-01 21:00 ` Michael Chan
2007-08-02 8:05 ` Joachim Deguara
2007-08-02 9:15 ` Joachim Deguara
2007-08-02 9:23 ` David Miller
2007-08-02 19:10 ` Michael Chan
2007-08-02 22:06 ` David Miller
2007-08-02 23:38 ` Michael Chan [this message]
2007-08-03 9:47 ` Joachim Deguara
2007-08-04 3:57 ` 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=1186097880.18322.73.camel@dell \
--to=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=joachim.deguara@amd.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).