From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@myri.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: joonwpark81@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: napi fix
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:29:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47601A73.5010804@myri.com> (raw)
[I apologize for loosing threading, I'm replying from the archives]
> The problem is that the driver is doing a NAPI completion and
> re-enabling chip interrupts with work_done == weight, and that is
> illegal.
The only time at least myri10ge will do this is due to
the !netif_running(netdev) check. Eg, from myri10ge's poll:
work_done = myri10ge_clean_rx_done(mgp, budget);
if (work_done < budget || !netif_running(netdev)) {
netif_rx_complete(netdev, napi);
put_be32(htonl(3), mgp->irq_claim);
}
Is the netif_running() check even required? Is this just
a bad way to solve a race with running NAPI at down() time
that would be better solved by putting a napi_synchronize()
in the driver's down() routine?
I'd rather fix this right than add another check to a
questionable code path.
Thanks,
Drew
next reply other threads:[~2007-12-12 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-12 17:29 Andrew Gallatin [this message]
2007-12-12 17:38 ` [RFC] net: napi fix David Miller
2007-12-12 17:40 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-12 18:41 ` Kok, Auke
2007-12-13 7:41 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-13 14:13 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-13 14:19 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 16:45 ` Kok, Auke
2007-12-13 18:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 19:02 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-12-13 19:09 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 19:35 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 20:38 ` David Miller
2007-12-14 2:06 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-13 13:49 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 13:50 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 14:14 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 20:16 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 20:41 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-13 21:55 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 22:28 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-13 22:34 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 22:58 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-12-20 9:52 ` Robert Olsson
2007-12-20 11:22 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-12 4:01 [PATCH 6/7] : tehuti Fix possible causing oops of net_rx_action Joonwoo Park
2007-12-12 5:39 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-12 5:46 ` [RFC] net: napi fix Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-12 6:05 ` Joonwoo Park
2007-12-12 15:22 ` David Miller
2007-12-12 15:21 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47601A73.5010804@myri.com \
--to=gallatin@myri.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=joonwpark81@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).