[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: tg3 - irq #: nobody cared!
"David S. Miller" <> 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

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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.033 / U:32.076 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site