Re: [PATCH] IBM Lanstreamer bugfixes

[Kent E Yoder]

>
>>   For #6, the udelay(1) had more to do with the following write() than 
>> with spin_lock().  When that delay was not there, the write failed 
>> randomly. The same with the udelay(10) at the end of the interrupt 
>> function...
>
>That smells of covering up a race rather than fixing something. Another
>thing you may be doing perhaps is hiding PCI posting effects ?

  Ok, I thought of one thing that might make things clearer here: when I 
say "the write failed", I mean that we saw the write go out on the PCI bus 
and then the box locked up.  We were looking at it on a PCI bus analyzer. 
That, and it wasn't just this write, or just writes in general, it really 
seemed random.

  BTW, I don't know what PCI posting effects are...

Kent