On 10-5-7 上午7:51, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:53:20AM +0800, Da Zheng wrote: > >> disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave is exactly the same as >> disable_irq_nosync when there isn't CONFIG_LOCKDEP. It seems to me >> that ne2k-pci shouldn't call it in the first place when transmitting >> packets, but Linux drivers should be correct. Then what goes wrong? >> Should the interrupt handler delays interrupts instead of ignoring >> them silently when the interrupt line is disabled? > > Not really an answer to your question -- but maybe you could try running > a Linux image with this driver in the same VM, so you could compare how > the driver behaves in its "native" environment?... It's difficult to observe the behavior of interrupt handling. It depends on how it is scheduled.
One thing I'm not sure of is whether the interrupt is completely ignored or is delayed to be delivered when a interrupt line is masked with IMR. If the interrupt is ignored, aren't many interrupts lost? Zheng Da
