[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4710901F.8010206@colorfullife.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:30:07 +0200
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
CC: Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>, nedev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: MSI interrupts and disable_irq
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> I think the scenario you outline is an illustration of the approach's
> fragility: disable_irq() is a heavy hammer that originated with INTx,
> and it relies on a chip-specific disable method (kernel/irq/manage.c)
> that practically guarantees behavior will vary across MSI/INTx/etc.
>
I checked the code: IRQ_DISABLE is implemented in software, i.e.
handle_level_irq() only calls handle_IRQ_event() [and then the nic irq
handler] if IRQ_DISABLE is not set.
OTHO: The last trace looks as if nv_do_nic_poll() is interrupted by an irq.
Perhaps something corrupts dev->irq? The irq is requested with
request_irq(np->pci_dev->irq, handler, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev)
and disabled with
disable_irq_lockdep(dev->irq);
Someone around with a MSI capable board? The forcedeth driver does
dev->irq = pci_dev->irq
in nv_probe(), especially before pci_enable_msi().
Does pci_enable_msi() change pci_dev->irq? Then we would disable the
wrong interrupt....
--
Manfred
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists