From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: atl1: WARNING at net/sched/sch_generic.c:221 Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080914.165655.193720725.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20080821120409.GA2226@x200.localdomain> <20080821.050857.131314665.davem@davemloft.net> <20080914142654.3114cb3a@osprey.hogchain.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: adobriyan@gmail.com, csnook@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: jacliburn@bellsouth.net Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:51316 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753375AbYINX5B (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:57:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080914142654.3114cb3a@osprey.hogchain.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jay Cliburn Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:26:54 -0500 > Should a netdev driver be coded such that a watchdog transmit timeout > never occurs? > > [ 2086.049998] NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0 (atl1): transmit timed out > > Or is a watchdog timeout an expected occurrence if a cable is > unplugged/plugged? If the cable is unplugged, netif_carrier_off() will be (or should be) invoked by the driver, and that cancels the watchdog timer. This is all from memory since I'm travelling and don't have the time to check this directly. You should investigate this yourself instead of asking me if you want a truly definitive answer :)