Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-24 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W. van den Akker wrote: > On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:28 W. van den Akker wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > > > > > > wrote: > > >> So I've gone back to the drawing board, and reviewed this issue > > >> as thoroughly a

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:19 PM, W. van den Akker wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM, W. van den Akker >> wrote: >>> On Monday 23 February 2009 18:48:09 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker >>> wrote: > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 L

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread W. van den Akker
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM, W. van den Akker > wrote: >> On Monday 23 February 2009 18:48:09 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker >> wrote: >>> > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM, W. van den Akker wrote: > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:48:09 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker > wrote: >> > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread W. van den Akker
On Monday 23 February 2009 18:48:09 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker wrote: > > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W. van den Akker wrote: > >> > On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:2

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread W. van den Akker
On Monday 23 February 2009 18:48:09 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker wrote: > > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W. van den Akker wrote: > >> > On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:2

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:45 AM, W. van den Akker wrote: > On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W. van den Akker wrote: >> > On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:28 W. van den Akker wrote: >> > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, L

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-23 Thread W. van den Akker
On Monday 23 February 2009 18:31:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:51:38PM -0800, W. van den Akker wrote: > > On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:28 W. van den Akker wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> So I've gone

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-22 Thread W. van den Akker
On Monday 16 February 2009 11:18:28 W. van den Akker wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > > > > wrote: > >> So I've gone back to the drawing board, and reviewed this issue > >> as thoroughly as I can. The issue is PCI reads/writes can overlap > >> with each other (not j

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-16 Thread W. van den Akker
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > wrote: >> So I've gone back to the drawing board, and reviewed this issue >> as thoroughly as I can. The issue is PCI reads/writes can overlap >> with each other (not just writes). This shouldn't generally be an >> issue but if some reads tak

Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-14 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > So I've gone back to the drawing board, and reviewed this issue > as thoroughly as I can. The issue is PCI reads/writes can overlap > with each other (not just writes). This shouldn't generally be an > issue but if some reads take a whil

[ath9k-devel] [RFC v2] Serialization of IO

2009-02-11 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
So I've gone back to the drawing board, and reviewed this issue as thoroughly as I can. The issue is PCI reads/writes can overlap with each other (not just writes). This shouldn't generally be an issue but if some reads take a while, for example, there could be another read/write on its way on anot