Hi,
2.5.69-bk7, SMP. Just a few pings on ad-hoc mode...
airo: Probing for PCI adapters
airo: Finished probing for PCI adapters
airo: Doing fast bap_reads
airo: MAC enabled eth0 0:7:e:b8:d4:9f
eth0: index 0x05: Vcc 5.0, Vpp 5.0, irq 5, io 0x0100-0x013f
irq 5: nobody cared!
Call Trace:
[<c010a998>] handle_IRQ_event+0x94/0xf8
[<c010aba6>] do_IRQ+0x96/0x100
[<c0109570>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20
[<cc838ea0>] socket+0x0/0x1a0 [i82365]
[<cc837163>] pcic_set_socket+0x3f/0x50 [i82365]
[<cc837265>] pcic_init+0x51/0x90 [i82365]
[<cc862670>] dead_socket+0x0/0xc [pcmcia_core]
[<cc838ec4>] socket+0x24/0x1a0 [i82365]
[<cc859051>] init_socket+0x29/0x30 [pcmcia_core]
[<cc85938e>] shutdown_socket+0x12/0xd8 [pcmcia_core]
[<cc838ec4>] socket+0x24/0x1a0 [i82365]
[<cc859717>] do_shutdown+0x57/0x5c [pcmcia_core]
[<cc859756>] parse_events+0x3a/0xd8 [pcmcia_core]
[<cc836465>] pcic_bh+0x5d/0x74 [i82365]
[<cc8390c4>] pcic_task+0x4/0x40 [i82365]
[<c01273ce>] worker_thread+0x1c2/0x290
[<c012720c>] worker_thread+0x0/0x290
[<cc836408>] pcic_bh+0x0/0x74 [i82365]
[<c01170bc>] default_wake_function+0x0/0x1c
[<c01170bc>] default_wake_function+0x0/0x1c
[<c0106f51>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xc
handlers:
[<cc876584>] (airo_interrupt+0x0/0x7b4 [airo])
hermes.c: 4 Jul 2002 David Gibson <[email protected]>
orinoco.c 0.13a (David Gibson <[email protected]> and others)
orinoco_cs.c 0.13a (David Gibson <[email protected]> and others)
eth0: Station identity 001f:0001:0007:001c
eth0: Looks like a Lucent/Agere firmware version 7.28
eth0: Ad-hoc demo mode supported
eth0: IEEE standard IBSS ad-hoc mode supported
eth0: WEP supported, 104-bit key
eth0: MAC address 00:60:1D:F0:3A:8A
eth0: Station name "HERMES I"
eth0: ready
eth0: index 0x01: Vcc 5.0, irq 5, io 0x0100-0x013f
eth0: New link status: Connected (0001)
orinoco_lock() called with hw_unavailable (dev=cb6ca800)
irq 5: nobody cared!
Call Trace:
[<c010a998>] handle_IRQ_event+0x94/0xf8
[<c010aba6>] do_IRQ+0x96/0x100
[<c0106d70>] default_idle+0x0/0x34
[<c0105000>] _stext+0x0/0x48
[<c0109570>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20
[<c0106d70>] default_idle+0x0/0x34
[<c0105000>] _stext+0x0/0x48
[<c0106d9c>] default_idle+0x2c/0x34
[<c0106e23>] cpu_idle+0x37/0x48
[<c0105045>] _stext+0x45/0x48
[<c030c738>] start_kernel+0x13c/0x144
handlers:
[<cc877074>] (orinoco_interrupt+0x0/0x25c [orinoco])
orinoco_lock() called with hw_unavailable (dev=cb6ca800)
cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0 CPU1
0: 704444 235801 IO-APIC-edge timer
1: 141 27 IO-APIC-edge i8042
2: 0 0 XT-PIC cascade
3: 124 100 IO-APIC-edge serial
5: 27 36 IO-APIC-edge orinoco_cs
7: 0 3 IO-APIC-edge WaveLAN
8: 0 3 IO-APIC-edge rtc
9: 2285 1632 IO-APIC-edge aic7xxx
10: 36095 11994 IO-APIC-edge HP J2585B
12: 56 38 IO-APIC-edge i8042
NMI: 0 0
LOC: 939094 940480
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
Have fun...
Jean
On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 11:28:40AM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
[snip]
> hermes.c: 4 Jul 2002 David Gibson <[email protected]>
> orinoco.c 0.13a (David Gibson <[email protected]> and others)
> orinoco_cs.c 0.13a (David Gibson <[email protected]> and others)
> eth0: Station identity 001f:0001:0007:001c
> eth0: Looks like a Lucent/Agere firmware version 7.28
> eth0: Ad-hoc demo mode supported
> eth0: IEEE standard IBSS ad-hoc mode supported
> eth0: WEP supported, 104-bit key
> eth0: MAC address 00:60:1D:F0:3A:8A
> eth0: Station name "HERMES I"
> eth0: ready
> eth0: index 0x01: Vcc 5.0, irq 5, io 0x0100-0x013f
> eth0: New link status: Connected (0001)
> orinoco_lock() called with hw_unavailable (dev=cb6ca800)
> irq 5: nobody cared!
> Call Trace:
> [<c010a998>] handle_IRQ_event+0x94/0xf8
> [<c010aba6>] do_IRQ+0x96/0x100
> [<c0106d70>] default_idle+0x0/0x34
> [<c0105000>] _stext+0x0/0x48
> [<c0109570>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20
> [<c0106d70>] default_idle+0x0/0x34
> [<c0105000>] _stext+0x0/0x48
> [<c0106d9c>] default_idle+0x2c/0x34
> [<c0106e23>] cpu_idle+0x37/0x48
> [<c0105045>] _stext+0x45/0x48
> [<c030c738>] start_kernel+0x13c/0x144
>
> handlers:
> [<cc877074>] (orinoco_interrupt+0x0/0x25c [orinoco])
> orinoco_lock() called with hw_unavailable (dev=cb6ca800)
Jean, I think this was a mistake in the original adaption of the
driver to the new irq stuff (which I didn't do). It mistakenly
returns IRQ_NONE if hw_unavailable is set in the interrupt handler
(wrong based on the "return IRQ_HANDLED" if in doubt rule). Does this
still happen with 0.13e? I've properly implemented the new IRQ stuff
there.
--
David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a
[email protected] | solution which is simple, neat and
| wrong.
http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson