From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 29 16:13:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107E9B44; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:13:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2D01E45; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0312B917; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:13:32 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: hiren panchasara Subject: Re: svn commit: r249800 - head/sys/dev/bwn Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:23:41 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p25; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <201304231302.r3ND2w5V024981@svn.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201304291123.41402.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:13:32 -0400 (EDT) Cc: svn-src-head , Adrian Chadd , src-committers , Eitan Adler , svn-src-all X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:13:40 -0000 On Sunday, April 28, 2013 8:06:16 pm hiren panchasara wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 9:46 AM, hiren panchasara wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: > >> On 23 April 2013 12:19, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >>> ... you know, even though it doesn't have an active maintainer, do you > >>> have test hardware, and why didn't you just bounce a patch to > >>> -wireless for review? > > > > My bad. I proposed this change initially. > >>> > >>> We don't bite you know! > >> > >> that you need to emphasize this does not comfort me. ;) > >> > >> reverted in 249812. > > > > Will look at john's suggestions and fix it correctly. > > John, > > Does this look okay? > > % svn diff > Index: if_bwn.c > =================================================================== > --- if_bwn.c (revision 250036) > +++ if_bwn.c (working copy) > @@ -9240,9 +9240,9 @@ > BUS_DMASYNC_PREWRITE); > > /* > - * Setup RX buf descriptor > + * Restore RX buf descriptor > */ > - dr->setdesc(dr, desc, paddr, meta->mt_m->m_len - > + dr->setdesc(dr, desc, meta->mt_paddr, meta->mt_m->m_len - > sizeof(*hdr), 0, 0, 0); > return (error); > } I would leave the comment alone. In the common case you do allocate a new mbuf so you aren't restoring the descriptor but setting it up with a new address. The code change looks correct. -- John Baldwin