On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 08:05, David S. Miller wrote: > So I'm going to check this in and push upstream. Let me know > if folks find any other errors.
Hi Dave Sorry to be the one with bad news. I am in favour of this idea, but there are still issues that need to be sorted out. > ===== drivers/net/sungem.c 1.72 vs edited ===== > --- 1.72/drivers/net/sungem.c 2004-11-05 15:56:15 -08:00 > +++ edited/drivers/net/sungem.c 2005-01-19 22:29:14 -08:00 > @@ -932,12 +932,12 @@ > readl(gp->regs + MAC_RXCFG)); > > spin_lock_irq(&gp->lock); > - spin_lock(&gp->tx_lock); > + spin_lock(&dev->xmit_lock); > > gp->reset_task_pending = 2; > schedule_work(&gp->reset_task); > > - spin_unlock(&gp->tx_lock); > + spin_unlock(&dev->xmit_lock); > spin_unlock_irq(&gp->lock); > } > ->tx_timeout() can't take dev->xmit_lock, since dev_watchdog already has it held. A lot more serious is the fact that ->tx_timeout() and ->hard_start_xmit() are no longer allowed to do this: spin_lock_irq() ... spin_unlock_irq() since that would leave us with irq's enabled while still holding the xmit_lock. This would have to be fixed for non-LLTX drivers as well. -Tommy _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
