tx_full v.s tx_free race fix in 8xx_io/enet.c?

Joakim Tjernlund joakim.tjernlund at lumentis.se
Thu Dec 4 04:08:17 EST 2003

> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:00:27AM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > It seems to me that the old tx_full stuff is working better that the
> > new tx_free.
> What problem are you seeing without making any changes to the
> code as it
> stands?

I have impl. the NAPI method in enet.c and had removed the spin_lock_irq()
in the xmit procedure since I don't belive I need these any more and all was well.
Then I discoverd I had forgotten to apply the tx_free change so I added it and
then I got an oops. Restoring the spin_lock_irq() makes the behaviour identical.

Thats why I wonder what race they are supposed to fix since the only difference
I get is the above oops on a mpc862.

Something I find a bit odd is that I can run ping -s 1472 -f <myTargetIp>
without problems, but if i "jump start" the ping with "ping -s 800 -f <myTargetIp> -l 8"
I start to loose packages. Ifconfig shows no errors for both cases.
Do you get the same?


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

More information about the Linuxppc-embedded mailing list