Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271043AbTG1Usm (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:48:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270824AbTG1UqQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:46:16 -0400 Received: from firewall.mdc-dayton.com ([12.161.103.180]:6879 "EHLO firewall.mdc-dayton.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271036AbTG1UpR (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:45:17 -0400 From: "Kathy Frazier" To: , "Mark Hahn" Subject: RE: Problems related to DMA or DDR memory on Intel 845 chipset? Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:56:42 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2668 Lines: 64 Mark, >> then "hang". I had discovered that upon this failure, the logic analyzer >> shows that our device is asserting the interrupt. However, I also found (by >> adding my own debug to the kernel) that the 8259 Programmable Interrupt >> Controller never received the interrupt (it's bit was not set in the >OK, so the problem is strictly on the PCI bus, between your device >and the PIC (or apic?) That would appear to be the case. But as I said, it appears to be a nasty side affect from something that has gone wrong during a DMA transfer. BTW, we are using PIC >> interrupt on the device). At this point of failure, no other IRQs are >> getting through, so the system appears to be completely hard hung even >> though various software components are still running. We are operating in a >so why do you think this is a software problem? I made this posting to see if anyone else has had problems with this hardware or to see if there were any known issues similar to what I've found. >> employs the DDR memory technology) running Linux 2.4.20-8. Further testing >> has shown that "not receiving an interrupt" is just a nasty side affect from >> something that has gone wrong during a DMA transfer by our device. This was >> discovered when I changed the driver to poll for a DMA completion rather >> than have it interrupt me. Our system still hung. We are have tried >that one mystifies me: how do you conclude the problem is a broken >DMA transfer if, when you convert to polling, the problem remains? Why? The device is _still_ a DMA device. In this particular test I told it to initiate the DMA, but I did not enable it's ability to interrupt me when it was finished with the DMA. I poll to watch for it's completion. >my conclusion would be that your device has somehow managed to lock >up the PIC's state-machine, or is somehow playing nasty with the bus. I haven't ruled that out. . . . Meanwhile, I made another discovery on the internet that indicates that DMA is not supported with an ICH4 controller (which is what this system has) until Linux version 2.5.12 (we're using 2.4.20-8). See: http://64.143.3.64/downloads/drivers/845/perform/linux/udma.htm. I posted a question concerning this to linux-kernel. See thread: DMA not supported with Intel ICH4 I/O controller? Unfortunately, I have not received any response that supports or refutes this. Any thoughts? Thanks, Kathy - 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/