Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263887AbTEOGKl (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 02:10:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263891AbTEOGKk (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 02:10:40 -0400 Received: from modemcable204.207-203-24.mtl.mc.videotron.ca ([24.203.207.204]:16770 "EHLO montezuma.mastecende.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263887AbTEOGK0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 02:10:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 02:13:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Zwane Mwaikambo X-X-Sender: zwane@montezuma.mastecende.com To: Andrew Morton cc: Patrick Mochel , "" , Felipe Alfaro Solana Subject: Re: 2.5.69-mm5: reverting i8259-shutdown.patch In-Reply-To: <20030514231414.42398dda.akpm@digeo.com> Message-ID: References: <20030514193300.58645206.akpm@digeo.com> <20030514231414.42398dda.akpm@digeo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 770 Lines: 21 On Wed, 14 May 2003, Andrew Morton wrote: > I'd say that as long as the shutdown routines are executed in reverse > order of startup, then the core driver stuff has fulfilled its > obligations. > > In this case we need to understand why the lockup is happening - what > code is requiring 8259 services after the thing has been turned off? > Could be that the bug lies there. The registration is somewhat unfair here, it depends on device_initcall and we initialise the 8259 in init_IRQ. Zwane -- function.linuxpower.ca - 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/