Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:08:14 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
Cc:        Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, Pyun YongHyeon <yongari@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/em if_em.c
Message-ID:  <44EBD4AE.2060304@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20060822205444.jdp@polstra.com>
References:  <XFMail.20060822205444.jdp@polstra.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Polstra wrote:

> On 23-Aug-2006 Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:23:33PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>>I think that problem is different one. That problem happens when
>>interrupt is shared with other devices. In these configuration
>>em(4) misses lots of Tx completion interrupts and devices that
>>use the shared interrupt stop working in the long run.
>>It seems that debug.mpsafenet=0 mitigate the issue.
>>
>> > So I think there is a problem in FreeBSD or driver, not in chip.
>> > 
>>Agreed. If my memory serve me right it introduced right after
>>switching to taskqueue(9) in interrupt handling(rev, 1.98).
> 
> 
> I was wondering about something in connection with this.  The em
> interrupt handler is now a "fast" handler, but the interrupt is still
> allocated with bus_alloc_resource_any(..., RF_SHAREABLE).  If I
> remember correctly, fast interrupts cannot be shared.  So, isn't it
> wrong to allocate the interrupt with RF_SHAREABLE?
> 
> John

Fast interrupts have been sharable as of about a year ago.

Scott




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44EBD4AE.2060304>