From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-next 0/8] bnx2x: Device Control Channel bug fixes Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:09:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20091014.150922.64618889.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1255532825.25030.35.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: eilong@broadcom.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:59247 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753635AbZJNWJZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:09:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1255532825.25030.35.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: "Eilon Greenstein" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:07:05 +0200 > This bnx2x patch series is fixing some bugs that relates to the Device > Control Channel (DCC) code. There are actually 3 different failures: > > 1. When the fairness initial value was set to zero, the device could not > be enabled. This is caused since zero indicated that the mechanism is > disabled, and the code (both FW and driver) was not ready to allow > enabling it at run time. This patch requires replacing the FW - to allow > easier review, it is split to 3 patches: > P1: adding the new FW > P2: the actually patch > P3: removing the old FW > > 2. Races when loading/unloading the driver when DCC link enable/disable > commands are received. There were 3 different races: > P4: The state of the driver which indicates if it is loaded or > not was also used to signal if its link is enabled/disabled by > DCC > P5: The FW commands to acknowledge the DCC command and > loading/unloading the driver run over each other > P6: Setting/clearing the MAC address and the FW filtering rules > > 3. P7: Reporting the maximal BW as the link speed > > Patch number 8 is the version update. > > The patches were made based on net-next. Since those are bug fixes, > please let me know if I should send them based on net-2.6 as well. Applied to net-next-2.6, which is where this likely belongs. Thanks!