* Jeremy Fitzhardinge ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Yep, this patch gets rid of my spinning thread. I can't find this patch
> or any discussion on marc.info; is there a better netdev list archive?
See the "linkwatch bustage in git-net" thread on netdev
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:45:42 -0700
> David Miller wrote:
> > I'm not so certain now that we know it's the jiffies wrap point :-)
> >
> > The fixes in question are attached below and they were posted and
> > discussed on netdev:
> >
>
> Yep,
David Miller wrote:
> I'm not so certain now that we know it's the jiffies wrap point :-)
>
> The fixes in question are attached below and they were posted and
> discussed on netdev:
>
Yep, this patch gets rid of my spinning thread. I can't find this patch
or any discussion on marc.info; is
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:22:17 -0700
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Five minutes after boot is when jiffies wraps. Are you sure it's
> > a list-screwup rather than a jiffy-wrap screwup?
> >
>
>
> Hm, its suggestive, isn't it? Apparently they've
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Five minutes after boot is when jiffies wraps. Are you sure it's
> a list-screwup rather than a jiffy-wrap screwup?
>
Hm, its suggestive, isn't it? Apparently they've already fixed this in
the sekret networking clubhouse, so I'll need to track it down.
J
-
To
On Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > [NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
> >
> > These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
> > network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it
David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
>
>
>> Herbert Xu wrote:
>>
>>> [NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
>>>
>>> These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
>>> network subsystem as
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > [NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
> >
> > These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
> > network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it
Herbert Xu wrote:
> [NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
>
> These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
> network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
> makes sense to allocate some memory for it in net_device rather
> than allocating it on
Herbert Xu wrote:
[NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
makes sense to allocate some memory for it in net_device rather
than allocating it on demand.
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
Herbert Xu wrote:
[NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
makes
David Miller wrote:
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
Herbert Xu wrote:
[NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
network subsystem as it manages the
On Thu, 10 May 2007 15:00:05 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Herbert Xu wrote:
[NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
makes
Andrew Morton wrote:
Five minutes after boot is when jiffies wraps. Are you sure it's
a list-screwup rather than a jiffy-wrap screwup?
Hm, its suggestive, isn't it? Apparently they've already fixed this in
the sekret networking clubhouse, so I'll need to track it down.
J
-
To
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:22:17 -0700
Andrew Morton wrote:
Five minutes after boot is when jiffies wraps. Are you sure it's
a list-screwup rather than a jiffy-wrap screwup?
Hm, its suggestive, isn't it? Apparently they've already fixed
David Miller wrote:
I'm not so certain now that we know it's the jiffies wrap point :-)
The fixes in question are attached below and they were posted and
discussed on netdev:
Yep, this patch gets rid of my spinning thread. I can't find this patch
or any discussion on marc.info; is there
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:45:42 -0700
David Miller wrote:
I'm not so certain now that we know it's the jiffies wrap point :-)
The fixes in question are attached below and they were posted and
discussed on netdev:
Yep, this patch gets
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Yep, this patch gets rid of my spinning thread. I can't find this patch
or any discussion on marc.info; is there a better netdev list archive?
See the linkwatch bustage in git-net thread on netdev
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 22:13:22 +1000
> [NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
>
> These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
> network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
> makes sense to allocate some
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Sorry, I had forgotten that I've already concluded previously that
> this doesn't work because we don't want to prevent the interface
> from being brought up (and other reasons). My memory is failing me :)
>
> So I think the best option now is to get rid of the delay on
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 02:10:27PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> > We should just change this to use netif_device_attach and
> > netif_device_detach.
>
> Like this?
Sorry, I had forgotten that I've already concluded previously that
this doesn't work because we don't want to prevent the
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 02:10:27PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
We should just change this to use netif_device_attach and
netif_device_detach.
Like this?
Sorry, I had forgotten that I've already concluded previously that
this doesn't work because we don't want to prevent the
Herbert Xu wrote:
Sorry, I had forgotten that I've already concluded previously that
this doesn't work because we don't want to prevent the interface
from being brought up (and other reasons). My memory is failing me :)
So I think the best option now is to get rid of the delay on carrier
on
From: Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 22:13:22 +1000
[NET] link_watch: Move link watch list into net_device
These days the link watch mechanism is an integral part of the
network subsystem as it manages the carrier status. So it now
makes sense to allocate some memory
24 matches
Mail list logo
