Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 07:57:08 -0400
From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: tg3 - irq #: nobody cared!
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com
Message-ID: <200305070759_MC3-1-37C0-ECE3@compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1101
Lines: 27

Andrew Morton wrote:

>> 
>> 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.

  On thinking about it further, I don't think you will ever be able to write
such code -- whether "interrupt received but no pending work" is an error
or not is a private matter between the driver and its device.  All you can
really ask the driver for is "was that interrupt generated by your device?"


-
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/