Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751297AbWERLKZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 07:10:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751306AbWERLKZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 07:10:25 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:59148 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751297AbWERLKY (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 07:10:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:10:15 +0100 From: Russell King To: Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , Andreas Mohr , florin@iucha.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net Subject: Re: pcmcia oops on 2.6.17-rc[12] Message-ID: <20060518111015.GA3767@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , Andreas Mohr , florin@iucha.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net References: <20060423192251.GD8896@iucha.net> <20060423150206.546b7483.akpm@osdl.org> <20060508145609.GA3983@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> <20060508084301.5025b25d.akpm@osdl.org> <20060508163453.GB19040@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1147730828.26686.165.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060515220044.GA14849@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060515220044.GA14849@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1432 Lines: 32 On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 11:00:44PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 11:07:08PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Llu, 2006-05-08 at 17:34 +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > > So 8250 is requesting an IRQ for non-sharing mode and it's actually > > > > failing, because something else is already using that IRQ. The difference > > > > is that the kernel now generates a warning when this happens. > > > > > > Maybe someone is clearing the UPF_SHARE_IRQ flag? Which port is this? > > > > Its a bug in the PCMCIA code. Its the one I hit with the IDE code. > > Asking for a private IRQ is not always honoured. > > Not in this case - the call trace is definitely a result of setserial > being used. serial_cs _always_ registers ports with 8250 with the > share IRQ flag set. Given that no one has responded to my comments on this, I take it that this is a case of user error or distro scripting error. setserial should never be used to clear the shared IRQ flag bit unless there's a very good reason (eg, the admin knows that the IRQ should not be shared.) -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - 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/