On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Vlad Zakharov <Vladislav.Zakharov at synopsys.com> wrote: > I am not sure what is happening with other drivers, but in case of ezchip nps_enet driver after the following commit: > 39e6c8208d7b6fb9d2047850fb3327db567b564b > > if we got into NAPI_STATE_MISSED state the following happened: > in nps_enet_poll func we were calling napi_complete_done() (which reset MISSED state but left SCHED state) and after > that without any checks were enabling interrupts. > > Then we obviously were getting into nps_enet_irq_hanlder() if irq was pending (it is very possbile state). If we look > inside this function we will see that it disables interrupts only in case napi_sched_prep() returns true. In its turn > napi_sched_prep() returns true only in case it changes state from non-SCHED to SCHED. But in our case as SCHED had been > already set it set MISSED state and then returned false. So at that point we had already been trapped: after exiting irq > hanlder we were getting into nps_enet_irq_hanlder() again and again as we couldn't rescind pending irq signal and > disable corresponding irq. Hi Vlad Considering the use of napi_schedule_prep() in nps_enet_irq_handler(), it is strange that nps_enet_poll() uses : if (nps_enet_is_tx_pending(priv)) { nps_enet_reg_set(priv, NPS_ENET_REG_BUF_INT_ENABLE, 0); napi_reschedule(napi); // note the return value is ignored... } So nps_enet_poll() was enabling interrupts, then disabling them, which seems very unusual. I need to check all drivers using napi_schedule_prep() and/or napi_reschedule() and make sure they also test napi_comple_done() return value... I count 12 drivers using napi_reschedule() without checking its return value. They either should check its return value, or use conventional napi_schedule() Thanks !