![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2003-05-06 at 15:03, john stultz wrote: > > Not sure if this is the proper fix, but it stops the kernel from > > complaining. I saw Andrew suggest something similar for a sound driver. > > Definitely not the right fix. If the hardware status struct > indicates no event is pending, then we return 0 since we > didn't "handle" the interrupt. This is about the fifth report of unhandled interrupts. Against the fifth driver which looks to be correct. So I'd be suspecting the scenario which Alan outlined: the IRQ handler looped around, scooped up the interrupt source before the APIC delivered the IRQ. I'm working on the actual detection code - it tries to filter out the false positives. Suggest we ignore these reports until that is sorted out. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:35 [W:0.236 / U:0.710 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||