Re: PATCH dm9ks interrupt handling

Sorry, add attachment.
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:27 +0800, Terry Qiu wrote:
> I just got the new driver for the dm9ks from vendor. 
> 
> I quick look through it, it seems fix this problem. But they don't clean
> out the code about the CONT_RX_PKT_CNT and the timer. 
> They now set the CONT_RX_PKT_CNT=0xFFFF and set the
> db->cont_rx_pkt_cnt=0 first in  dmfe_packet_receive() 
> 
> I will merge it into OSD, if any of you want to see the original code
> from vendor, The attachment is.
> 
> regards
> 
> /tqiu
> 
> On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 14:14 +0800, Terry Qiu wrote:
> > I have sent a mail to DAVICOM about this, will let you know what we got.
> > 
> > regards
> > 
> > /tqiu
> > 
> > On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 15:57 +0100, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
> > > Michael Gao wrote:
> > > > 5 second timer seems crazy to me too. However if we remove it
> > > > completely, this may bring us a situation where the interrupt is held
> > > > too long?
> > > 
> > > I checked the original davicom driver
> > > (http://www.davicom.com.tw/eng/download/Driver/driver_9000a.htm) it also
> > > has this disable interrupts after X consecutive rx packets without tx
> > > thing.
> > > 
> > > It smells quite a bit like a workaround for some hardware bug to me. But
> > > it could be something different it tries to solve; or just a clueless
> > > engineer implementing the driver :)
> > > 
> > > I'd really like to know why that code is there, and what purpose it has.
> > > 
> > > (as a side note the changes from the original davicom driver "06/17/2006
> > >     Butchered for NTR3 OSD" are quite big and messy)
> > > 
> > > Are there documentation for this NIC available btw?
> > > 
> > > >> I have removed this mechanism and also removed the bogus ioctl handler
> > > >> that just returned success to all calls, which makes things like the
> > > >> mii interface look like they work, but always return junk!
> > > >>
> > > > MG: Not sure about this, do we need this stub for driver compatibility
> > > > purpose? thus not getting NULL pointer if somewhere upper layer will
> > > > ever call the ioctl?
> > > 
> > > It is not needed, upper layer takes care of that
> > > (http://lxr.linux.no/source/net/core/dev.c#L2612)
> > > 
> > >  anders
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
FOR REALTIME DISCUSSION GO TO IRC #neuros on freenode

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neuros-DM320" group.
To post to this group, send email to Neuros-DM320Hardware <at> googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Neuros-DM320Hardware-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Neuros-DM320Hardware
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---