Frank de Lange wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 08:04:24PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > I removed the disable_irq lines from 8390.c, and that fixed the problem:
> > no hang within 2 minutes - the test is still running.
> >
> > Frank, could you double check it?
>
> I'm currently running my own patched version, which uses
> spin_lock_irq/spin_unlock_irq instead of
> spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore like you patch uses. Looking at
> spinlock.h, spin_lock_irq does a local irq disable, which seems to be closer to
> the original intent (disable_irq) than spin_lock_irqsave. Anyone want to
> comment on this?
>
It's a bit dangerous: _if_ one of the function is called with disabled
local interrupts, then spin_unlock_irq would enable these interrupts.
That could cause other problems, but I haven't checked if these function
are actually called with disabled interrupts - e.g. the transmit
function is called with enabled interrupts.
Frank, the 2.4.0 contains 2 band aids that were added for ne2k smp:
* From Ingo: focus cpu disabled, in arch/i386/kernel/apic.c
* From myself: TARGET_CPU = cpu_online_mask, was 0xFF.
Could you disable both bandaids? I disabled them, no problems so far.
Now back to the disable_irq_nosync().
-- Manfred - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 15 2001 - 21:00:34 EST