Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:46:20 -0700 From: Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> To: Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: question in ixgbe_legacy_irq Message-ID: <CAFOYbcnXh9SxUnnqps3TnEZEJavae9AD=yA==GfPXF2j_dHLZg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CALCNsJTR89m4AwD1Y4z4f=oL8iQkyYhxhZ9P7YU0OB1kWtQm0g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CALCNsJTR89m4AwD1Y4z4f=oL8iQkyYhxhZ9P7YU0OB1kWtQm0g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
No, that's probably wrong, but was not noticed because the legacy interrupt path has been unused. The only time I've ever used it was during initial development and debug :) I'm taking the day off, but I'll take a closer look at the code shortly. Jack On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com> wrote: > Folks, the ixgbe_legacy_irq() interrupt handler kicks the taskqueue if > there is more rx or tx. > > > 1440 if (more_rx || more_tx) > 1441 taskqueue_enqueue(que->tq, &que->que_task); > > But then it enables interrupts unconditionally: > > 1454 > 1455 ixgbe_enable_intr(adapter); > > Is this correct? > > -vijay > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFOYbcnXh9SxUnnqps3TnEZEJavae9AD=yA==GfPXF2j_dHLZg>