[etherlab-users] r8169 patch - packet timeout boot failures

[Jeroen Van den Keybus]

Is there a difference between cold and warm boot ? Does unloading the ec
driver, loading/unloading the stock r8169 driver and then reloading the ec
driver work better ? Same scenario but with Realtek drivers (r8168) ? Also
perhaps compile with -DRTL8169_DEBUG ?

Just some thoughts.

J.


2013/12/2 Raz <raziebe at gmail.com>

> The timeouts happens after the system boots and not while slaves are in in
> OP mode. So my transmit is irrelevant here, even though a transmit happens
> only from a single thread of through an ioctl ( SDO reads and so on..)
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Jeroen Van den Keybus <
> jeroen.vandenkeybus at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> 1. why do you disable the rtl8169_phy_timer  timer ?
>>>
>>
>> The rtl8169_phy_timer is regularly polled in ec_poll instead.
>>
>>
>>
>>> 2.  In rtl_hw_start_8168 : why do disable RTL_W16(IntrMask,
>>> tp->intr_event); ?
>>>
>>>
>> The drivers are all non-blocking and interrupt-free. All work that
>> interrupt handlers normally do is done in ec_poll instead.
>>
>> If you cannot send packets anymore, I suspect that you may have overrun
>> the tx queue, i.e. sent a packet before the previous one has been
>> completed. You're also not calling the ethercat transmission functions from
>> different threads, right ?
>>
>>
>> thank you
>>> raz
>>>
>>> --
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/ironspeedlinux/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> etherlab-users mailing list
>>> etherlab-users at etherlab.org
>>> http://lists.etherlab.org/mailman/listinfo/etherlab-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> https://sites.google.com/site/ironspeedlinux/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.etherlab.org/pipermail/etherlab-users/attachments/20131202/51c104b3/attachment-0003.htm>