From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: Realtek 8139 driver (8139too.c) TX Timeout doesn't allow interrupt handler to disable receive interrupts at high bi-directional traffic Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 00:46:04 +0100 Message-ID: <20061109234604.GA17969@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: <010C7BAE6783F34D9AC336EE5A01A08802BB30D7@dbde01.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com ([213.41.134.224]:61125 "EHLO fr.zoreil.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1424286AbWKIXt3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2006 18:49:29 -0500 To: "Basheer, Mansoor Ahamed" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <010C7BAE6783F34D9AC336EE5A01A08802BB30D7@dbde01.ent.ti.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Basheer, Mansoor Ahamed : [...] > My understanding here is, on receive interrupt the ISR should disable > the receive interrupt irrespective of the polling task's state (active > or inactive). Apparently it could happen even with 2.6.19-rc5, yes. > I changed the code (as shown below) and it works perfectly. Afaics your change may disable the Rx irq right after the poll routine enabled it again. It will not always work either. The (slow) timeout watchdog could grab the poll handler and hack the irq mask depending on whether poll was scheduled or not. > Is this a known issue? If so, is there a fix already available? > > Also, we get frequent TX timeouts during high rate of traffic. What > could be the reason for this frequent TX timeouts? No idea. Have you considered upgrading to a kernel which is not almost 2 years old ? -- Ueimor