[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question about use of PMAD-AA ethernet adapter on Decstation

On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 10:56:22PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Len Sorensen wrote:
> [snip]
> > Trace; 8005da74 <update_process_times+34/11c>
> > Trace; 8005dd18 <timer_bh+160/168>
> > Trace; 8005de64 <do_timer+144/14c>
> > Trace; 800598e4 <bh_action+60/d8>
> > Trace; 801263bc <timer_interrupt+f8/1cc>
> > Trace; 800596a0 <tasklet_hi_action+110/1a4>
> > Trace; 80158898 <lance_interrupt+2b0/2d8>
> > Trace; 80158888 <lance_interrupt+2a0/2d8>
> > Trace; 80059170 <do_softirq+1a0/1a8>
> > Trace; 8004a6e8 <do_IRQ+e4/12c>
> > Trace; 8004a728 <do_IRQ+124/12c>
> > Trace; 80125574 <handle_it+8/10>
> > Trace; 80125574 <handle_it+8/10>
> > Trace; 800432dc <cpu_idle+6c/74>
> > Trace; 800432c0 <cpu_idle+50/74>
> > Trace; 8020a37c <p.1+324/d38>
> > Trace; 8004042c <init+0/194>
> > Trace; 8020959c <genexcept_early+dc/9f0>
> Those twice mentioned functions look funny.

I wonder if both drivers got an interrupt at the same time, but I am not
really sure how interrupts are handled in the kernel.

> [snip]
> > Command running: ping\
> > 
> > About 15 machines are on the network and were responding to the ping.
> Does the DECstation work stable in this case if it runs only with
> the onboard interface?

I have had uptimes of 2 months on this machine, doing apt-get upgrades
and such.  Never had it lock up on me before I tried using the PMAD-AA

> Any chance the PMAD-AA crashes always after the same amount of
> rx/tx traffic?

Doesn't look like it.  I wonder if it needs both network cards to have
an interrupt simultaniously for it to happen.  I am having a hard time
rerpoducing it today.

> Btw, while looking at the drivers source, I found some strange bits:
> In dec_lance_init(), the lp->[rt]x_buf_ptr_cpu pointers for PMAD-AA are
> initialized differently than the others, but the cp_{to,from}_buf()
> functions handle it the same way than the onboard interface. AFAICS
> this is a bug.
> Further, dev->mem_end is only initialized for the onboard lance, not
> for the others, but that's probably a minor glitch.

So at least a couple of things look like they need a bit of fixing then.

Len Sorensen

Reply to: