> So I started to add more load (another 100Mbits/sec) and > before the extra load ramped up, the kernl BUG'd. The > msec_delay barfed because "in_interrupt()" was true - and > rightly so - the dev_timeout bh code called e1000_tx_timeout. > The "linux-ized" version schedules a separate task to do this > preventing the BUG. Sorry, that was my fault; just haven't propagated the schedule_task code to the non-kernel driver. The kernel driver is OK. Replace BUG with mdelay in msec_delay for temp fix. > So, I am assuming there are still problems with "zero-copy" > enabled because of the dev_timeout call. That wouldn't be good! Can you share more details on the send tests that your running? I'd like to try to reproduce this. -scott - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
