From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263156AbVHEXwq (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2005 19:52:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263107AbVHEXwe (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2005 19:52:34 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:55273 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263135AbVHEXvX (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Aug 2005 19:51:23 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 01:51:22 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Matt Mackall Cc: Andi Kleen , John B?ckstrand , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: lockups with netconsole on e1000 on media insertion Message-ID: <20050805235122.GI8266@wotan.suse.de> References: <42F347D2.7000207@home.se.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20050805201215.GG7425@waste.org> <20050805215650.GH8266@wotan.suse.de> <20050805232015.GX8074@waste.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050805232015.GX8074@waste.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > But why are we in a hurry to dump the backlog on the floor? Why are we > worrying about the performance of netpoll without the cable plugged in > at all? We shouldn't be optimizing the data loss case. Because a system shouldn't stall for minutes (or forever like right now) at boot just because the network cable isn't plugged in. > > My primary concern here is that the loop have a non-negligible extent > in time. 5 loops is effectively equal to none. I'd be very surprised > if it was even enough for deglitching. In the normal case the packets should just be send out. -Andi