[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0807190707q296ef898xa0235186cc628edc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:07:55 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Alan Jenkins" <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>
Cc: "Alexey Starikovskiy" <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
"Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" <hmh@....eng.br>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] acpi: GPE fixes
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Alan Jenkins
<alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Here's what I came up with -
>
> 1. I was fighting against EC_FLAGS_QUERY_PENDING. This was used to ignore
> multiple successive GPE interrupts and treat them as a single GPE instead.
> That's the exact opposite of what we want to do. Let's get rid of it.
>
> 2. Then we can apply my original patch to fix GPE polling on the Asus EeePC,
> by repeatedly querying for GPEs until there are none left.
>
> 3. Finally, if I'm right then we now know how to handle "GPE interrupt storms".
> Some EC's are raising multiple interrupts before we acknowledge them. but
> they're just telling us how many events are pending. There's no harm in
> that, so we don't ever need to disable GPE interrupts. Let's get rid of
> GPE polling mode. (Code mainly stolen from Alexey).
Hi,
I have seen the "GPE storm" message before but it had no apparent
side-effects. Your patches do not seem to change this, although the
message is now gone. Thanks! (I have an Acer Aspire 5720 laptop.)
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
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