Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:04:25 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] tpm: interrupt clear fix] |
| |
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:35:20AM -0700, Kylene Jo Hall wrote: > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > From: Kylene Jo Hall <kjhall@us.ibm.com> > To: linux-os (Dick Johnson) <linux-os@analogic.com> > Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, TPM Device Driver List > <tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, akpm@osdl.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: interrupt clear fix > Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:24:36 -0700 > Under stress testing I found that the interrupt is not always cleared. > This is a bug and this patch should go into 2.6.18 and 2.6.17.x. > > On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 07:45 -0400, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote: > > > PCI devices need a final read to flush all pending writes. Whatever > > mb() does, just hides the problem. > > > Signed-off-by: Kylene Hall <kjhall@us.ibm.com> > --- > > --- linux-2.6.18-rc1/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c 2006-07-13 14:46:39.727500500 -0500 > +++ linux-2.6.18-rc1-tpm/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c 2006-07-13 14:47:33.878884750 -0500 > @@ -424,6 +424,7 @@ static irqreturn_t tis_int_handler(int i > iowrite32(interrupt, > chip->vendor.iobase + > TPM_INT_STATUS(chip->vendor.locality)); > + ioread32(chip->vendor.iobase + TPM_INT_STATUS(chip->vendor.locality)); > return IRQ_HANDLED; > }
So does this replace the other tpm patch? Or should we apply both of them?
thanks,
greg k-h - 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/
| |