Re: DPRINTKs in e1000 code (2.6.x kernels)
Auke Kok wrote: I'm in need of coffee - these changes got queued for 2.6.18. They're in jgarziks netdev-2.6.git, but not anywhere in 2.6.17rcX Auke Thanks for the clarification ! Regards, Amit Arora - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: DPRINTKs in e1000 code (2.6.x kernels)
Auke Kok wrote: Amit Arora wrote: On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ? they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a month ago. I do not think these DPRINTKs have been removed from the latest code. Or, they did get removed at some point of time, but somehow again got added. I checked in 2.16.17-rc4 kernel, and also in the following versions of e1000 codebase (pulled from git://lost.foo-projects.org/~ahkok/git/netdev-2.6): e1000-7.0.38-k1, -k2 ... -k5 e1000-7.0.41 All of the above versions have the concerned DPRINTKs in e1000_suspend() and other routines. Please check once and let me know if I am missing something. Thanks! git-show d0e027db7861ef03de0ac08494a9a61984d8f8b0 it's really in there - please use jgarzik's netdev#upstream branch. Not sure if it already made it to 2.16.17-rc5, but I don't think this made it into 2.16.17-rc4, so that is where you may be missing it. I'm in need of coffee - these changes got queued for 2.6.18. They're in jgarziks netdev-2.6.git, but not anywhere in 2.6.17rcX Auke - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: DPRINTKs in e1000 code (2.6.x kernels)
Amit Arora wrote:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ?
they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a month ago.
I do not think these DPRINTKs have been removed from the latest code.
Or, they did get removed at some point of time, but somehow again got
added.
I checked in 2.16.17-rc4 kernel, and also in the following versions of
e1000 codebase (pulled from
git://lost.foo-projects.org/~ahkok/git/netdev-2.6):
e1000-7.0.38-k1, -k2 ... -k5
e1000-7.0.41
All of the above versions have the concerned DPRINTKs in e1000_suspend()
and other routines.
Please check once and let me know if I am missing something. Thanks!
git-show d0e027db7861ef03de0ac08494a9a61984d8f8b0
it's really in there - please use jgarzik's netdev#upstream branch. Not sure
if it already made it to 2.16.17-rc5, but I don't think this made it into
2.16.17-rc4, so that is where you may be missing it.
Auke
---
ref.:
diff-tree d0e027db7861ef03de0ac08494a9a61984d8f8b0 (from
a145410dccdb44f81d3b56763ef9b6f721f4e47c)
Author: Auke Kok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri Apr 14 19:04:40 2006 -0700
e1000: Remove PM warning DPRINTKs breaking 2.4.x kernels
remove DPRINTKs that were printing warnings about power management on
2.4 kernels. Since we really don't react differently these printk
statements are not needed. This code was originally added to fix
some compile time warnings that got fixed by newer kernels.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Brandeburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Auke Kok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: John Ronciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
index add8dc4..ac1e838 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
@@ -4515,21 +4515,13 @@ e1000_suspend(struct pci_dev *pdev, pm_m
E1000_WRITE_REG(&adapter->hw, WUC, E1000_WUC_PME_EN);
E1000_WRITE_REG(&adapter->hw, WUFC, wufc);
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 1);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error enabling D3 wake\n");
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 1);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error enabling D3 cold wake\n");
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 1);
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 1);
} else {
E1000_WRITE_REG(&adapter->hw, WUC, 0);
E1000_WRITE_REG(&adapter->hw, WUFC, 0);
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 0);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error enabling D3 wake\n");
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 0);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error enabling D3 cold wake\n");
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 0);
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 0);
}
if (adapter->hw.mac_type >= e1000_82540 &&
@@ -4538,13 +4530,8 @@ e1000_suspend(struct pci_dev *pdev, pm_m
if (manc & E1000_MANC_SMBUS_EN) {
manc |= E1000_MANC_ARP_EN;
E1000_WRITE_REG(&adapter->hw, MANC, manc);
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 1);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error enabling D3 wake\n");
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 1);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR,
- "Error enabling D3 cold wake\n");
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 1);
+ pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3cold, 1);
}
}
@@ -4554,9 +4541,7 @@ e1000_suspend(struct pci_dev *pdev, pm_m
pci_disable_device(pdev);
- retval = pci_set_power_state(pdev, pci_choose_state(pdev, state));
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error in setting power state\n");
+ pci_set_power_state(pdev, pci_choose_state(pdev, state));
return 0;
}
@@ -4567,22 +4552,15 @@ e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
{
struct net_device *netdev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
struct e1000_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
- int retval;
uint32_t manc, ret_val;
- retval = pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR, "Error in setting power state\n");
+ pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
e1000_pci_restore_state(adapter);
ret_val = pci_enable_device(pdev);
pci_set_master(pdev);
- retval = pci_enable_wake(pdev, PCI_D3hot, 0);
- if (retval)
- DPRINTK
Re: DPRINTKs in e1000 code (2.6.x kernels)
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 16:30, Auke Kok wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ? > > they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a > month ago. I do not think these DPRINTKs have been removed from the latest code. Or, they did get removed at some point of time, but somehow again got added. I checked in 2.16.17-rc4 kernel, and also in the following versions of e1000 codebase (pulled from git://lost.foo-projects.org/~ahkok/git/netdev-2.6): e1000-7.0.38-k1, -k2 ... -k5 e1000-7.0.41 All of the above versions have the concerned DPRINTKs in e1000_suspend() and other routines. Please check once and let me know if I am missing something. Thanks! > Also, if you are getting these errors there are several fixes in 7.0.38+ in > the kernel that might be related. especially the WoL fix that re-enables the > shutdown handler correctly might fix this issue for you. Please give this > kernel/module a try (see > http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg12689.html). > > Cheers, > > Auke Regards, Amit Arora - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: DPRINTKs in e1000 code (2.6.x kernels)
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:31:05 +0530, Amit K Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I am wondering why this patch "e1000: Remove PM warning DPRINTKs > breaking 2.4.x kernels" > (http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg10803.html) was > meant only for 2.4 kernels, and _not_ for 2.6 kernels. this code was removed from our generic driver first which is available for 2.4 kernels as well. we try to keep the in-kernel 2.4 and 2.6-driver as close to the general module because we spend a lot of time testing that particular driver. The removal from the 2.6 kernel has two motivations: - sync with the standalone tarball driver on e1000.sf.net - pci subsystem smartness should take care of warning on those operations > These DPRINTKs in e1000_suspend() are currently resulting in following > messages while rebooting a system (2.6 kernel) which has e1000 adapter: > > Shutting down MD Raid > done > Stopping udevd: > done > proc umounted > The system will be halted immediately. > md: stopping all md devices. > e1000: eth3: e1000_suspend: Error enabling D3 wake <<== > e1000: eth3: e1000_suspend: Error enabling D3 cold wake <<== > Power down. > > > Should these DPRINTKs be removed from the 2.6.x e1000 code as well ? they already are. the patch was merged in 7.0.38-k2 or so which is over a month ago. Also, if you are getting these errors there are several fixes in 7.0.38+ in the kernel that might be related. especially the WoL fix that re-enables the shutdown handler correctly might fix this issue for you. Please give this kernel/module a try (see http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg12689.html). Cheers, Auke - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
