| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0711161112440.25869@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:20:51 +0000 (GMT) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org> To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: question on odd APIC behavior On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > On irq 20, there's an UHCI, on irq 19 is an EHCI. For every interrupt on 20 > > > there's a spurious interrupt on 19. USB devices on bus of the controller on 20 > > > work. So I know all interrupts are seen. ERR does not increase. Interrupts > > > for devices on the bus of the controller on 19 arrive at 19 only. > > > > I suggest you try to sort it out with the maintainers of the UHCI and > > EHCI drivers then. > > They are innocent. This laptop really delivers an interrupt twice. Perhaps, but these drivers are involved and the device-specific knowledge will help tracking down the cause. I have general experience on how interrupts work, including on APIC-based systems, but I have no idea how UHCI and EHCI devices work in this area and, in particular, how you know an interrupt coming from the line #19 is related to one on the line #20 and then a spurious one if not recorded as ERR or otherwise unclaimed (which would be reported as "irq 19: nobody cared"). Maciej - 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