[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: if_iwn.c patch to support the 5100... (analysis + patch)
On Sep 18, 9:14am, sverre%viewmark.com@localhost (Sverre Froyen) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: if_iwn.c patch to support the 5100... (analysis + patch)
| On Fri September 18 2009 04:05:19 Brett Lymn wrote:
| > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 09:39:20AM -0600, Sverre Froyen wrote:
| > > It looks like these errors may be because iwn_init is called a second
| > > time before the first call has completed. It is called via the "if_init"
| > > pointer and also through iwn_ioctl. The call via the ioctl path only
| > > happens if the IFF_UP is set. I notice that, e.g., net/if_ethersubr.c
| > > sets this flag before the call to if_init. While this seems
| > > counterintuitive to me it is appears to be the way it's always worked.
| > > The simplest fix is to remove the call to iwn_init from iwn_ioctl:
| > Doesn't that have the unfortunate side effect of you then being unable
| > to reset the interface by doing an ifconfig down/up?
| You are correct. Calling it a patch was an exaggeration. I quick test shows
| that ifconfig up/down indeed leaves the interface in a non-working state.
| (Still better than a panic at boot, though.)
| In order to serialize access (or really prevent a second simultaneous access)
| is the following the correct approach?
cvs rdiff -u -r1.151 -r1.152 src/sys/netinet6/in6.c
cvs rdiff -u -r1.82 -r1.83 src/sys/netinet6/in6_ifattach.c
cvs rdiff -u -r1.11 -r1.12 src/sys/netinet6/in6_ifattach.h
Can you try backing out those three changes instead?
Main Index |
Thread Index |