Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:27:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:27:30 -0500 Received: from algx-tower-com-4173.z188-2-66.customer.algx.net ([66.2.188.62]:36779 "EHLO neon.limebrokerage.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:26:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:35:19 -0500 (EST) From: Ion Badulescu X-X-Sender: ion@guppy.limebrokerage.com To: "Martin J. Bligh" cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix starfire compiler warning on PAE In-Reply-To: <33980000.1041887671@flay> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3062 Lines: 69 On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > Fix the compiler warning, yes; fix the driver for 64-bit dma_addr_t, no. > > It may work with PAE, by chance, if all addresses returned by pci_map_single > > and friends are < (1 << 33), but not otherwise. > > Odd. It seems to work with PAE now. pci_map_single just casts an address > though ... are the things you're passing it always allocated from ZONE_NORMAL? > I run these all the time on 16Gb machines with 16 processors (ia32 NUMA-Q). I get them from the network stack, and I supposed they're guaranteed to be in ZONE_NORMAL as long as the adapter doesn't list NETIF_F_HIGHDMA among its features. So yes, you're right that it will probably work with PAE, but it won't work with a real 64-bit box, methinks. > Cool! Sorry, I've just been seeing that warning for about 1 year, and was > sick of it. I was kinda busy and didn't get a chance to do much with the driver over the last 10 months or so... I also didn't have any boxes which could do real PAE, so I didn't try very hard -- until recently, that is. :-) > Sorry, missed that. But in that case, I have another question for you ;-) > Why do I get wierd errors like this: > > Jan 6 10:09:53 larry kernel: eth0: Increasing Tx FIFO threshold to 80 bytes > Jan 6 10:09:56 larry kernel: eth0: Increasing Tx FIFO threshold to 96 bytes A few of these are mostly normal, it's the card signalling the driver that it is getting a Tx fifo underrun, and the driver responds by increasing the threshold at which the card starts transmitting the packet. > Jan 6 10:12:29 larry kernel: eth0: Increasing Tx FIFO threshold to 448 bytes > Jan 6 10:12:29 larry kernel: eth0: Increasing Tx FIFO threshold to 464 bytes These are very high, however; it could be that there really is very high contention on the PCI bus, but otherwise I can't explain them. If they stop before reaching 1500, then it's probably ok and just something you're gonna have to live with. Otherwise it's a bug of some sort. > I also recall getting errors like "Something Wicked happened", but I > don't seem to be able to find them in the log right now. Yeah, the interrupt status (printed right after the messages) would have been helpful... That said, there is a known race condition in the v1.3.6 of the driver, which could cause timeouts and erors under certain circumstances. It's all fixed in 1.3.9 (the full 64-bit support version) and 1.4.0 (NAPI support). Both of those will do real 64-bit transfers, without the need for double buffering, so it should help on your 16GB boxes. I could forward you one of those versions, if you want to test it. In fact, I'd appreciate some testing! :-) Thanks, Ion -- It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/