From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Causey Subject: Re: Is via-velocity broken in 2.6.34? Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 17:13:14 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20100907.163331.260082741.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.213.46]:52613 "EHLO mail-yw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751738Ab0IHANQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2010 20:13:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100907.163331.260082741.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:33 PM, David Miller wrot= e: > > Please always CC: netdev@vger.kernel.org for networking reports. > > Give this patch a try: > > -------------------- > via-velocity: Turn scatter-gather support back off. > > It causes all kinds of DMA API debugging assertions and > all straight-forward attempts to fix it have failed. > > So turn off SG, and we'll tackle making this work > properly in net-next-2.6 > > Reported-by: Dave Jones > Tested-by: Dave Jones > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller > --- > =A0drivers/net/via-velocity.c | =A0 =A02 +- > =A01 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/via-velocity.c b/drivers/net/via-velocity.c > index fd69095..f534123 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/via-velocity.c > +++ b/drivers/net/via-velocity.c > @@ -2824,7 +2824,7 @@ static int __devinit velocity_found1(struct pci= _dev *pdev, const struct pci_devi > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0netif_napi_add(dev, &vptr->napi, velocity_poll, VELOCI= TY_NAPI_WEIGHT); > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0dev->features |=3D NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_TX | NETIF_F_HW_VLA= N_FILTER | > - =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX | NETIF_F_IP_CSUM | = NETIF_F_SG; > + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX | NETIF_F_IP_CSUM; > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0ret =3D register_netdev(dev); > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0if (ret < 0) So before I posted to the list, I actually dug through looking for recent changes which would be trivial for me to back out. This was the only one I had found, so I tried it. :-) No luck though...same result. Thanks, -- Matt