Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262886AbUCWXG0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:06:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262898AbUCWXG0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:06:26 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20]:53953 "HELO mail.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262886AbUCWXGY (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:06:24 -0500 X-Authenticated: #20450766 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:10:57 +0100 (CET) From: Guennadi Liakhovetski To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" cc: "Richard B. Johnson" , , , Subject: RE: spurious 8259A interrupt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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: 1035 Lines: 30 On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > Yes, I saw this your explanation. Thanks again. But, I am not getting > > those errors with local APIC disabled. That's why I thought "local APIC -> > > Is the local APIC normally disabled, i.e. do you see a message like: > "Local APIC disabled by BIOS -- reenabling." when you boot with your local > APIC enabled? That might explain the difference. Yes. > what you observe. As the local APIC latches edge-triggered interrupts it > receives (unlike the 8259A) a glitch on an interrupt line does not have to > last long enough for a CPU to accept it for a spurious interrupt to be > recorded. Ok, I'll buy it. And thanks for the explanations! Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski - 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/