From: Daniel Ritz <daniel.ritz@gmx.ch>
Reply-To: daniel.ritz@gmx.ch
To: Jonas Oreland <jonas.oreland@mysql.com>
Subject: Re: yenta_socket "nobody cared - Disabling IRQ #4" - WORKING!!
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 22:14:41 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       linux-pcmcia <linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org>
References: <200503182243.24174.daniel.ritz@gmx.ch> <200503190051.28548.daniel.ritz@gmx.ch> <423BDD37.5090604@mysql.com>
In-Reply-To: <423BDD37.5090604@mysql.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200503192214.41827.daniel.ritz@gmx.ch>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 4741
Lines: 138

On Saturday 19 March 2005 09:05, Jonas Oreland wrote:
> Hi again and thx again,
> 
> SUMMARY: It's working with new hook (wo/ trying second part)
>          I'll post again if error comes up again.

that's good news!

> 
> Daniel Ritz wrote:
> > On Saturday 19 March 2005 00:00, Jonas Oreland wrote:
> >>
> >>>it's the second time now i see this problem with an atheros chipset in
> >>>combination with a TI bridge. last time it was the 1225...
> >>>attached a patch that could help...
> >>>
> >>
> >>Report:
> >>1) It works somewhat better. irq doesn't get disabled.
> >>2) however wlan card get disfunctional. I haven't been able to contact my wap
> >>   even if i'm standing on it...
> > 
> > 
> > i was afraid that it could have some side effects. it's probably because just
> > writing a 0 to the MFUNC register is stupid...can you try to replace ti12xx_hook()
> > in ti113x.h with this one?
> > 
> 
> yes, now it works!!! (limited testing)
> I tried rebooting plugging/unplugging/swsuspending maybe 6 times.
> All of them working, that a new record :-)
> 
> Should I try "second step" anyway?

not neccessarily..

> 
> >>3) unplug has resulted in kernel panic (twice)
> >>   (btw: how do I do to capture and report those)
> > 
> > 
> > at a first guess i would blame the atheros driver which taints the kernel.
> > so try _not_ loading the atheros driver and see if it still happens. if
> > so the messages please. to capture them you can use a serial console
> > (null modem cable to second pc). check out the "remote serial console"
> > howto on www.tldp.org
> 
> might be...the driver...haven't tried wo/ it.
> 
> note: I never got this after new hook,
> 
> > 
> > 
> >>4) when unlug don't produce kernel panic, then there is no way of power-oning that card again.
> >>5) booting with the card inserted makes it not power on when yenta_socket is loaded (module)
> > 
> > 
> > anything in dmesg then?
> 
> zero
> 
> >>comment: the card being disfunction could have something to with the driver.
> >>but before it worked sometimes...
> >>
> >>
> >>>--------------
> >>>
> >>>for TI bridges: turn off interrupts during card power-on. this seems
> >>>to be neccessary for some combination of TI bridges with at least CB cards
> >>>with atheros chipset...problem is that they produce an interrupt storm
> >>>during power-on so the kernel happens to disable the IRQ which is a bad
> >>>thing (tm).
> >>>adds a generic hook function so that a socket driver can hook into
> >>>almost anywhere (by adding more hook points of course). this is the
> >>>cleanest way i can think of. and it allows adding more workarounds
> >>>for more problems...
> >>>for the TI specific interrupt on-off stuff just save the MFUNC register
> >>>and set it to 0 to disable all interrupts, restore it afterwards.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Daniel Ritz <daniel.ritz@gmx.ch>
> >>
> >>Some thoughts: (not I'm neither pcmcia nor linux expert).
> >>
> >>The "irq storm", shouldn't that be "acked" in someway.
> >>I.e. the card produced a lot of irq's (that get ignored)
> >>isn't the "real" solution to capture them, and "do something clever"?
> >>
> >>Instead of just "shutting the card down".
> >>
> >>hmmm...wonder if that made sence
> > 
> > 
> > it's the CB device that is making the interrupt storm and the TI
> > bridge is stupid enough to let the interrupts thru during power
> > on. thing is you can't ack them at this time because the cardbus
> > resources are not set up at this time and ack'ing an IRQ is
> > device specifc.
> 
> ok
> 
> >>Question: Why do you think that it worked sometimes before?
> > 
> > 
> > pure luck?
> 
> How about 2.4? can you compare cs code with 2.6?
> It always worked in 2.4...

the problem is there also, it just doesn't show up. 2.6 checks for
every interrupt if one of the handlers took care of it. if not the
dump is printed and a counter is increased. if this counter reaches
a limit the interrupt line is disabled. 2.4 doesn't do it so the interrupt
storm is there too, it just recovers...you can try with 2.4...after you
have the card up do a "cat /proc/interrupts" and you'll see a high
number for yenta's interrupt line...

> 
> /Jonas
> 
> > can you also give me a dump of /proc/iomem?
> 
[snip /proc/iomem]

it was just to be sure nothing is mapped over existing physical RAM
which is not the case...

i'll cook up a more flexible patch which handles other TI bridges
as well (the current one will fail on some older controllers and
on 2-slot controllers)

rgds
-daniel

-
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/