Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751207AbVKWQdk (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:33:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751244AbVKWQdj (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:33:39 -0500 Received: from styx.suse.cz ([82.119.242.94]:27584 "EHLO mail.suse.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751207AbVKWQdi (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:33:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:33:37 +0100 From: Vojtech Pavlik To: Marc Koschewski , Jon Smirl , Greg KH , lkml Subject: Re: Christmas list for the kernel Message-ID: <20051123163337.GB2434@ucw.cz> References: <20051122204918.GA5299@kroah.com> <9e4733910511221313t4a1e3c67wc7b08160937eb5c5@mail.gmail.com> <20051123121726.GA7328@ucw.cz> <9e4733910511230643j64922738p709fecd6c86b4a95@mail.gmail.com> <20051123150349.GA15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <9e4733910511230719h67fa96bdxdeb654aa12f18e67@mail.gmail.com> <20051123160231.GC6970@stiffy.osknowledge.org> <20051123161637.GI15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051123162337.GA2434@ucw.cz> <20051123162728.GJ15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051123162728.GJ15449@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> X-Bounce-Cookie: It's a lemon tree, dear Watson! User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1279 Lines: 29 On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 04:27:28PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 05:23:37PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 04:16:37PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > > It means that we spun in the serial interrupt for more than 256 times > > > and reached the limit on the amount of work we were prepared to do. > > > Any idea what you were doing when these happened? > > > > Because ACPI was right and the second serial port isn't there? > > Well, it certainly looked like a serial port when it was probed - to the > extent that even loopback mode worked. Hence I'd be very surprised if > it wasn't there. > > It's the same test that's being applied as has been for the last 14 > years to detect if a port is present or not. Maybe Ted T'so would > be aware if it can optimistically discover ports? If the loopback check is still enabled - then no, I've seen the probe code and that chance is next to zero, unless the i/o space is aliasing to a real port. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR - 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/