On 05/11/2010 09:31 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > On 11.05.2010 20:53, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Hi Oliver, >> >> On 05/10/2010 07:09 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > >>> i wonder whether it is enough just to settle the register write of the >>> command register by adding the ndelay(). >> >> We need some protection, of course. Also, ndelay() is not available on >> all archs and might be mapped to udelay(1). In the patch you posted, an >> extra read is done for that purpose, I assume. > > Yes. That was surely Klaus' intention - i just copied this little sniplet ;-) > > >>> But IMO additionally the tx path should probably generally take the >>> hands of the chip, when the used hard-irq for rx operations is active. >>> >>> I would suggest sja1000_interrupt() and sja1000_start_xmit() not to run >>> together. What about some _bh-locking in sja1000_start_xmit() ??? >> >> Yes, fine, especially if it does solve the issue with the command >> register as well? > > As Kurt already pointed out the _bh locking is probably not enough here - i > think it's only used for blocking soft-irqs ...
Yes. > Will take a closer look ... For the time being, I tend to fix just the problem for the system where is shows up. It would be nice if we could reproduce it somehow. Klaus, on what hardware did you realize that problem? Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
