From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Mackall Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent netpoll hanging when link is down Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 16:50:26 -0500 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20041007215025.GT31237@waste.org> References: <20041006232544.53615761@jack.colino.net> <20041006214322.GG31237@waste.org> <20041007075319.6b31430d@jack.colino.net> <20041006234912.66bfbdcc.davem@davemloft.net> <20041007160532.60c3f26b@pirandello> <20041007112846.5c85b2d9.davem@davemloft.net> <20041007224422.1c1bea95@jack.colino.net> <20041007214505.GB31558@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Colin Leroy , "David S. Miller" , akpm@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Andi Kleen Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041007214505.GB31558@wotan.suse.de> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 11:45:05PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:44:22PM +0200, Colin Leroy wrote: > > On 07 Oct 2004 at 11h10, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > Hi again, > > > > > So, netpoll needs to have the NETIF_F_LLTX stuff added to it. > > > > This patch should do that. It works OK for me, but I'd like it checked > > before sent upstream... > > > > However, it doesn't fix the hang. it looks like this hang is really > > coming from sungem. > > IMHO it's not needed. Taking xmit_lock is harmless even when > the NETIF_F_LLTX flag is set. > > (or at least it was with my original patchkit. In theory it's > possible someone changed their driver to take xmit_lock in hard_start_xmit, > but if they did that I would just consider it a driver bug) Ok, this part makes sense. > The only drawback is that there won't be a reply when the driver try > lock fails, but netpoll doesn't have a queue for that anyways. You could > probably poll then, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. But your meaning here is not entirely clear. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.