Hi,
Jack Vogel wrote:
Vladimir,
Your one phrase "more or less patched" invalidated the whole
data point. We are talking about code thats checked in and bound
for 6.3 :)
Oops. I've got it. Maybe we talk about different kinds of watchdog. I
have meant TX queue watchdogs.
Yes, there is a pr
Vladimir,
Your one phrase "more or less patched" invalidated the whole
data point. We are talking about code thats checked in and bound
for 6.3 :)
I have hundreds of machines here at Intel that DON'T have the
problem, that's why in early 20th century philosophy they realized
that verificatio
Scott Long wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
I have found that the FAST interrupt handling is implicated
in the watchdog resets that I have seen.
It's not true. I have seen watchdogs much earlier then FASTINTR.
Also, please note: older driver had a bug preventing watchdog to be
reported (see http://w
Jack Vogel wrote:
I have found that the FAST interrupt handling is implicated
in the watchdog resets that I have seen.
What I plan to do is revert to the way 6.2 had things, meaning
that FAST interrupts will be available but defined off by default.
I wanted to know if anyone has an issue with
I have found that the FAST interrupt handling is implicated
in the watchdog resets that I have seen.
What I plan to do is revert to the way 6.2 had things, meaning
that FAST interrupts will be available but defined off by default.
I wanted to know if anyone has an issue with this. And more
impor
