On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 08:33:27AM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote: > 2007/8/9, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@xxxxx>: ... > > diff -Nurp 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2.6.23-rc1/kernel/irq/chip.c > > --- 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2007-07-09 01:32:17.000000000 +0200 > > +++ 2.6.23-rc1/kernel/irq/chip.c 2007-08-08 20:49:07.000000000 +0200 > > @@ -389,12 +389,19 @@ handle_fasteoi_irq(unsigned int irq, str > > unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > struct irqaction *action; > > irqreturn_t action_ret; > > + int edge = 0; > > ... > NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out > eth0: Tx timed out, lost interrupt? TSR=0x3, ISR=0x3, t=351. > eth0: Resetting the 8390 t=4295229000...<6>NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: > transmit timed out > eth0: Tx timed out, lost interrupt? TSR=0x3, ISR=0x3, t=718. > eth0: Resetting the 8390 t=4295230000...<6>NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: > transmit timed out > eth0: Tx timed out, lost interrupt? TSR=0x3, ISR=0x3, t=874. > etc... So, we still have to wait for the exact explanation... Thanks very much Marcin! I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?: Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200 If it's not a great problem it would be interesting to try this with different CONFIG_HZ too e.g. you could start with 100 (I guess, you tested very similar thing in 2.6.23-rc2 with 1000(?) already). Jean-Baptiste: you can skip/break testing of this 'experimental' patch, too. Regards, Jarek P. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
