From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Baptiste Favre Subject: Re: PCI passthrough issue Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:54:30 +0100 Message-ID: <4D4BBEC6.8070809@jbfavre.org> References: <4D47F9CF.2040107@jbfavre.org> <1296566401.13091.171.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4D4814CE.5050303@jbfavre.org> <1296569931.13091.194.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4D48234F.2020907@jbfavre.org> <4D4828D9.6090601@jbfavre.org> <1296577389.13091.288.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4D488355.8010706@jbfavre.org> <1296638873.13091.315.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4D4930F3.608@jbfavre.org> <20110202174250.GA8148@dumpdata.com> <4D4BBC15.4080201@jbfavre.org> <1296809586.13091.546.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Reply-To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1296809586.13091.546.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hello, Le 04/02/2011 09:53, Ian Campbell a =C3=A9crit : > On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 08:43 +0000, Jean Baptiste Favre wrote: >=20 >> >From Konrad: >> diff --git a/drivers/net/sky2.c b/drivers/net/sky2.c >> index 7d85a38..37c0631 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/sky2.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/sky2.c >> @@ -2331,7 +2331,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *receive_copy(struct >> sky2_port *sky2, >> if (likely(skb)) { >> pci_dma_sync_single_for_cpu(sky2->hw->pdev, re->data_addr, >> length, PCI_DMA_FROMDEVICE); >> - skb_copy_from_linear_data(re->skb, skb->data, length); >> + skb_copy_from_linear_data(skb, re->skb->data, length); >> skb->ip_summed =3D re->skb->ip_summed; >> skb->csum =3D re->skb->csum; >> pci_dma_sync_single_for_device(sky2->hw->pdev, re->data_addr, >=20 > Please don't apply this bit, the argument order to skb_copy.... can be = a > bit surprising if you assume it it is like memcpy. The original code is > correct. This is probably where your L2 issue came from. >=20 > Please can you try again with the just the WARN patch. Sure I can :) Did not understood Konrad's patch was incorrect, sorry. Regards, JB