From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:43:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:43:43 -0400 Received: from smtp1.cistron.nl ([195.64.68.40]:47881 "EHLO smtp1.cistron.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:43:26 -0400 Message-ID: <3BB22FF6.5E792CAA@cistron.nl> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 21:43:50 +0200 From: Alfred Munnikes Reply-To: munnikes@cistron.nl Organization: Munnikes X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.9 i686) X-Accept-Language: nl, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: PROBLEM: spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7. AND VM: killing process.. In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > eth0: RealTek RTL-8029 found at 0xe000, IRQ 10, 00:00:B4:B6:73:BC. > > > spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7. > > NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out > > eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x16, ISR=0x0, t=26. > > NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out > > eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x16, ISR=0x0, t=23. > > apparently interrupt 10 got lost and was delivered as a spurious > interrupt. This can be the result of out-of-spec hardware. (card or > board.) One moment, I haven't read the mail not totaly. My network card has IRQ 10 and the 'spurious 8259A interrupt' is about IRQ 7. Why should the IRQ change ? And with the 2.4.9 kernel I have also NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x16, ISR=0x0, t=24. ... but none 'spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7.' I don't think these 2 messages aren't related to eachother, isn't it a coincidence that they are comming after eachother ? Alfred