| Message ID | bbcbf584e3624059bf7a0d2186fec6b4@FE-MBX1012.de.bosch.com |
|---|---|
| State | Awaiting Upstream, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 02:32:16PM +0000, Koehrer Mathias (ETAS/ESW5) wrote: > With the Intel 82527EI (driver: e1000e) there is an issue when running > the ptpd2 program, that leads to a kernel oops. > The reason is here that in e1000_xmit_frame() a work queue will be > scheduled that has not been initialized in this case. > The work queue "tx_hwstamp_work" will only be initialized if > adapter->flags & FLAG_HAS_HW_TIMESTAMP set. > This check is missing in e1000_xmit_frame(). Why all the ragged lines? Better to use an editor that knows how to justify a paragraph, more like this: With the Intel 82527EI (driver: e1000e) there is an issue when running the ptpd2 program, that leads to a kernel oops. The reason is here that in e1000_xmit_frame() a work queue will be scheduled that has not been initialized in this case. The work queue "tx_hwstamp_work" will only be initialized if adapter->flags & FLAG_HAS_HW_TIMESTAMP set. This check is missing in e1000_xmit_frame(). That not only looks nicer, but it is also more readable. Thanks, Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 03:20:43PM -0400, Nick Krause wrote: > My question was as follows after reading the thread here is this patch > good or do I need to edit it > some more based on the thread and only putting part of the if > statement in an unlikely statement. Huh? Are you Mathias Koehrer? I was only complaining about the formatting of the change log comment. As far as the code goes, please see Alexander Duyck's emails. Thanks, Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 03:38:18PM -0400, Nick Krause wrote:
> I checked them and this patch seems fine to me.
No, it isn't fine. It ignores Alexander's comments. Mathias, can you
please fix it?
Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Index: linux-3.12.26/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c =================================================================== --- linux-3.12.26.orig/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c 2014-08-04 10:56:56.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-3.12.26/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c 2014-08-06 16:22:10.000000000 +0200 @@ -5549,8 +5549,9 @@ count = e1000_tx_map(tx_ring, skb, first, adapter->tx_fifo_limit, nr_frags); if (count) { - if (unlikely((skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP) && - !adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb)) { + if ((adapter->flags & FLAG_HAS_HW_TIMESTAMP) && + unlikely((skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP) && + !adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb)) { skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags |= SKBTX_IN_PROGRESS; tx_flags |= E1000_TX_FLAGS_HWTSTAMP; adapter->tx_hwtstamp_skb = skb_get(skb);
With the Intel 82527EI (driver: e1000e) there is an issue when running the ptpd2 program, that leads to a kernel oops. The reason is here that in e1000_xmit_frame() a work queue will be scheduled that has not been initialized in this case. The work queue "tx_hwstamp_work" will only be initialized if adapter->flags & FLAG_HAS_HW_TIMESTAMP set. This check is missing in e1000_xmit_frame(). The following patch adds the missing check. Signed-off-by: Mathias Koehrer <mathias.koehrer@etas.com> --- drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)