>
> > for (i = 0; i < NUM_TX_BUFF; ++i) {
> > - if (dev->tx_skb[i]) {
> > + if (dev->tx_skb[i] &&
> dev->tx_desc[i].data_ptr) {
>
>
> Why changing the test above ?
>
>The reason for changing this
Hi benh,
Please find my comments inline.
Thanks and regards,
SathyaNarayanan
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 4:50 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:54 +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > From: Sathya Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > The des
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:54 +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> From: Sathya Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The descriptor pointers were not initialized to NIL values, so it was
> poiniting to some random addresses which was completely invalid. This
> fix takes care of initializing the descriptor to N
From: Sathya Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The descriptor pointers were not initialized to NIL values, so it was
poiniting to some random addresses which was completely invalid. This
fix takes care of initializing the descriptor to NIL values and clearing
the valid descriptors on clean ring operat
