From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix forcedeth reversing the MAC address on suspend Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 02:47:56 +0100 Message-ID: <20080107014756.GB4170@atjola.homenet> References: <477BFC71.7090002@coderworld.net> <20080102214843.GA19224@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <20080102234209.GA10831@does.not.exist> <20080104034357.GA2113@atjola.homenet> <477E3DEA.4070001@coderworld.net> <20080104222633.GA21133@atjola.homenet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Adrian Bunk , Andreas Mohr , Ayaz Abdulla , jgarzik@pobox.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Richard Jonsson Return-path: Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:40174 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752628AbYAGBr7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 20:47:59 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080104222633.GA21133@atjola.homenet> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2008.01.04 23:26:33 +0100, Bj=F6rn Steinbrink wrote: > For cards that initially have the MAC address stored in reverse order= , > the forcedeth driver uses a flag to signal whether the address was > already corrected, so that it is not reversed again on a subsequent > probe. >=20 > Unfortunately this flag, which is stored in a register of the card, > seems to get lost during suspend, resulting in the MAC address being > reversed again. To fix that, the MAC address needs to be written back= in > reversed order before we suspend and the flag needs to be reset. >=20 > The flag is still required because at least kexec will never write ba= ck > the reversed address and thus needs to know what state the card is in= =2E >=20 > Signed-off-by: Bj=F6rn Steinbrink > --- > On 2008.01.04 15:08:42 +0100, Richard Jonsson wrote: > > Bj=F6rn Steinbrink skrev: > >> Richard, could you give this a spin? And then we'd likely need som= eone > >> to test that with kexec... > > > > The patch you sent does the trick, works fine now, thanks! > > I cannot test this with kexec as I barely know what it is, I'll lea= ve that=20 > > to someone else. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > Ayaz, you originally wrote the kexec fix (IIRC), was my analysis of t= he > problem correct? If so, I'm quite sure that the patch DTRT. Still it > should be tested for the rmmod+modprobe and the kexec case. I'll try = to > get my box free for some testing, but that's unlikely in the next few > days. Plus, I've never used kexec myself either. So I'd be grateful i= f > someone else would step up. =46ound a few minutes to test, but kexec would just hang for me. So I'm unable to test that atm. :-( Bj=F6rn