Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:30:47 +1000 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
Cc:        Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>, freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: em network issues
Message-ID:  <20061019192654.U77123@delplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <453724CA.8070609@samsco.org>
References:  <2a41acea0610181046k822afd1qcec4187dc8514187@mail.gmail.com> <b1fa29170610181523t6d240839i887632d6d7576762@mail.gmail.com> <2a41acea0610181531y732cd5sa7bf733cc445491c@mail.gmail.com> <20061018224233.GA1632@xor.obsecurity.org> <20061019110950.X75878@delplex.bde.org> <4536EF19.2060201@samsco.org> <20061019141748.Y76352@delplex.bde.org> <45371B91.5090507@samsco.org> <20061019164814.L76712@delplex.bde.org> <453724CA.8070609@samsco.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote:

> Bruce Evans wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote:
>>> Can you be more specific as to the 'bad things'?
>> 
>> Not very.  Maybe interrupts don't get reenabled as intended.  Then the
>> symptoms get mutated by watchdog timeouts.
>
> Then yes, I'm already thinking of a better way to do the interrupt 
> enable/disable thing.  I am still very surprised that the hardware
> cannot be silenced by doing a read and/or write of a status register,
> like most other hardware.  If that were possible, this would be a very
> simple problem.

Er, what is it that em_disable_intr() disables?

The problem might go the other way, being that em_enable_intr() doesn't
always work due to the device not liking high frequency toggling of the
interrupt mask register.

Bruce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061019192654.U77123>