On Sat, 1 May 1999, Philip Blundell wrote:
> >Yes, it is SMP indeed. A UP kernel+modules works allright, using either
> >3c509 or eexpress. A SMP kernel fails with both. The eexpress driver is
> >more interesting, though, it spits out these:
>
> I had a look through the eexpress driver and it did seem to be missing some
> SMP locking. I'm not especially hopeful that this will fix the problems you
> were seeing, but here's a patch that should do roughly the right thing anyway.
> I'd also be somewhat interested to hear if it makes any difference for better
> or worse on UP systems.
I assumed this was against 2.2.7. It at least applies, compiles and runs.
Also, I haven't been able to reproduce the bad behaviour again so this
approaches perfection ;) I still have a minor nitpick: the kernel spits
out "eth0: tx interrupt but no status" occasionally. It seems to be
harmless, but makes one think there are still problems with the driver.
Thanks a lot!
Taneli <taneli@firmament.fi>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/