From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claudio Lanconelli Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.24-git] net/enc28j60: oops fix, low power mode Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:28:29 +0100 Message-ID: <47B417CD.6040805@eptar.com> References: <20080205190124.E72F48E45F@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net> <200802100954.18225.david-b@pacbell.net> <47B03A9A.2060605@eptar.com> <200802111223.49823.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Brownell Return-path: Received: from fe-relay01.albacom.net ([217.220.57.138]:1384 "EHLO fe-relay01.albacom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752675AbYBNK1P (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:27:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200802111223.49823.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Brownell wrote: > On Monday 11 February 2008, Claudio Lanconelli wrote: > >> I have tried your latest patch. Only after the following change it >> works fine (no more rx errors during ifconfig up). >> > > Hmm, what chip rev do you have? Different errata and all. > ISTR mine is rev4; so, not the most current, but not the > oldest version either. > I use the same revision. >> I added enc28j60_lowpower(false) just before enc28j60_hw_init() >> > > Hmm, I'd have expected it would go best *before* that, but > what you include below shows it going *after* ... > > If there's some problem where reset doesn't work correctly > in low power mode, who knows what else would need manual > resetting. > > I don't know why it needs low power resume before reset. I read in the errata tath clkready bit after reset doesn't work reliably. May be something related to this, but undocumented. > Better yet, since I can't reproduce the problem, why don't > you just update my latest patch with the relevant version > of this tweak, and then forward it as "From: " me and with > both our signoffs. That's the usual way to cope with this > type of tweaking. (Not all updates to your driver should > need your signoff, but then most patches shouldn't need > very many iterations either.) > Done