On Monday 11 May 2009, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 11 May 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > /* temporarily mask (level sensitive) parent IRQ */
> > + desc->chip->mask(irq);
> > desc->chip->ack(irq);
> > while (1) {
>
> That looks like a clear bugfix to me ... even makes the code
> match the comment! Do any of the other parts of this patch
> really matter? I'd send that part upstream, by itself.
Testing results with *ONLY* that change: nuttcp ran for
many hours, 100 million IRQs, no dm9000 timeouts. (*)
Same test without adding that line: timeout within the
first hundred packets.
I wouldn't change the irq_chip methods though; as I mentioned
elsewhere, that seems incorrect.
- Dave
(*) But only 21 MByte/second sustained transfer rate.
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
