On Sunday 04 of January 2004 22:51, Don Lewis wrote: > I just took a closer look at the busdma diff, and this change to > dc_txeof() looks very suspicious: > > _at__at_ -2663,7 +2809,7 _at__at_ > if (txstat & DC_TXSTAT_OWN) > break; > > - if (!(cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_LASTFRAG) || > + if (!(cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_FIRSTFRAG) || > cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_SETUP) { > if (cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_SETUP) { > /* > > The code in the "if" block ends with a "continue" which will cause the > error handling code to be skipped if the "if" condition is true. I'm > pretty sure that the error status bits are only set in the last > descriptor for the frame, so we want to execute the "continue" unless > the DC_TXCTL_LASTFRAG bit is set. > > Try reverting this part of the busdma change. I tried this; although I'm now getting watchdog timeouts, I don't see any collisions and the few output errors probably come from timeouts. So I guess this is in the right direction. Could it be that we still need to do these lines: sc->dc_cdata.dc_tx_cnt--; DC_INC(idx, DC_TX_LIST_CNT); unless DC_TXCTL_FIRSTFRAG is set? I'll try playing with this now and see how it goes... DejanReceived on Sun Jan 04 2004 - 14:02:25 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:36 UTC