On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:44:14 +0200 Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2013/4/23 Thommy Jakobsson <thommyj@xxxxxxxxx>: > > Add handling of rx descriptor underflow. This fixes a fault that could > > happen on slow machines, where data is received faster than the CPU can > > handle. In such a case the device will use up all rx descriptors and > > refuse to send any more data before confirming that it is ok. This > > patch enables necessary interrupt to discover such a situation and will > > handle them by dropping everything in the ring buffer. > > Thommy: does it mean firmware actually ignores what we write to the > B43_DMA64_RXINDEX (recently renamed to the B43_DMA64_RXSTOPINDEX)? Is > our set_current_rxslot and op64_set_current_rxslot (same for 32bit > version) useless in this situation? > > Could this be a off-by-one issue? Maybe we're writing a value too low > by a one and firmware believes the whole ring is empty while it's > full? The ring looks the same if it's full or empty. We can only know that it is full when this interrupt fires, which happens as the indexes collide. -- Michael
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
