[vortex] Re: New driver - 0.99Q

[Andrew Morton]

Donald Becker wrote:
> 
> >
> > 1. - Why do we keep calling vortex_interrupt in case of physically blocked
> > interrupts? It's the same case as in vortex_tx_timeout - we give the
> > impression that the network is working (with lousy performance) when in
> > fact it doesn't.
> >    - How was the DownPollRate value chosen?
> 
> This is a fall-back to provide a minimal level operation when the interrupt
> line is physcially blocked.  This allows remote debugging of isolated
> machines.

Neat.

> Our clusters typically use SMP machines, and we keep getting burned by APIC
> configuration bugs appearing as driver bugs.  When you don't have a video
> card, it is very difficult guess what is going wrong.

Ah-hah.  I suspected this.  There are a couple of people reporting that
after some hours operation (kernel 2.3), they start getting "Interrupt
posted but not delivered" problems.  Everything looks good, but no
interrupts.  I assume this is the symptom of the interrupt controller
forgetting its state?

I need to work out a way of dumping the current h/w interrupt routing
tables so this can be confirmed.  But I haven't noticed similar reports
for other NICs (maybe the frequent eepro100 tx timeout probs?)

>
> ...
> 
> ________________
> 
> BTW, is anyone having problems with the new 'mailman' mailer, or the new
> list host?

It works for me.

-- 
-akpm-