On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 09:51:14PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > > this has been an age-old confusion that I never grasped either, so I > perfectly understand why you added the explicit e1000_disable_irq call in > the other patch (and think thats a great idea). But really, there should be > a way for a driver to tell the stack that it should really keep it's hands > off :)
Well yes, you can get the stack to keep away by not registering your device :) > BTW e1000 currently triggers a single irq manually in the watchdog as link > goes up, so that might be the one that is giving problems now. In any case > I can't reproduce any of it - perhaps my hardware is too fast. Time to whip > out the pIII :o Hmm, if it's triggered by the watchdog then that means the watchdog has been scheduled. However, it seems that the only way to schedule it is through an interrupt? Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
