On Wednesday 08 August 2007 01:08:08 David Miller wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 00:04:59 +0100
>
> > Please take a look at kernel/irq/handle.c. The irq handler is
> > always called with the right dev_id argument. Everything would be a
> > complete
From: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 00:04:59 +0100
> Please take a look at kernel/irq/handle.c. The irq handler is
> always called with the right dev_id argument. Everything would be a complete
> nightmare to handle because you usually need to access the device priv
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:20:35AM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 00:15:47 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:31:17 Michael Chan wrote:
> > >> +static irqreturn_t bnx2x_msix_sp_int(int irq, void *dev_instance)
> > >> +{
> >
> > +static irqreturn_t bnx2x_msix_sp_int(int irq, void *dev_instance)
> > +{
> > + struct net_device *dev = dev_instance;
>
> You need to check if dev==NULL and bail out.
> Another driver sharing the IRQ with this might choose to pass the dev
> pointer as NULL.
I don't really understand
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 00:15:47 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:31:17 Michael Chan wrote:
> >> +static irqreturn_t bnx2x_msix_sp_int(int irq, void *dev_instance)
> >> +{
> >> + struct net_device *dev = dev_instance;
> >
> > You need to check if d
Michael Buesch wrote:
On Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:31:17 Michael Chan wrote:
+static irqreturn_t bnx2x_msix_sp_int(int irq, void *dev_instance)
+{
+ struct net_device *dev = dev_instance;
You need to check if dev==NULL and bail out.
Another driver sharing the IRQ with this might choose
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 00:06 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> +static inline u32 bnx2x_tx_avail(struct bnx2x_fastpath *fp)
>
> Too big for inlining.
>
> > +{
> > + u16 used;
> > + u32 prod = fp->tx_bd_prod;
> > + u32 cons = fp->tx_bd_cons;
> > +
> > + smp_mb();
>
> This barrier need
Jeff, Roland,
Thanks for taking a look.
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Roland Dreier wrote:
> > +{ PCI_VENDOR_ID_BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710,
> > +PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, BCM5710 },
FWIW, this could be neater as
{ PCI_VDEVICE(BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710), BCM5710 }
OK
Michal,
Thanks for going over the code.
My responses are inline.
Eliezer
Michael Buesch wrote:
On Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:31:17 Michael Chan wrote:
+typedef struct {
+ u8 reserved[64];
+} license_key_t;
No typedef.
What is a "license key" used for, anyway?
This will be removed.
Roland Dreier wrote:
> > +{ PCI_VENDOR_ID_BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710,
> > +PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, BCM5710 },
FWIW, this could be neater as
{ PCI_VDEVICE(BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710), BCM5710 }
Yes. And additionally, I prefer (but not require) that
> > + { PCI_VENDOR_ID_BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710,
> > + PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, BCM5710 },
FWIW, this could be neater as
{ PCI_VDEVICE(BROADCOM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_NX2_5710), BCM5710 }
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the bod
On Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:31:17 Michael Chan wrote:
> +typedef struct {
> + u8 reserved[64];
> +} license_key_t;
No typedef.
What is a "license key" used for, anyway?
> +#define RUN_AT(x)(jiffies + (x))
That macro does only obfuscate code, in my opinion.
If you want jiffies
12 matches
Mail list logo
