From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <47CE9A92.10206@domain.hid> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 14:05:22 +0100 From: Wolfgang Grandegger MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <47CE8544.9070800@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Shared IRQ issue with Xeno Peak PCI CAN driver List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Klaas Gadeyne Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Klaas Gadeyne wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Klaas Gadeyne wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> we're having a problem finding a non-shared IRQ for a PEAK systems can >>> board in a particular industrial SBC with PCI backplane [*]. >>> Loading the xeno_can_peak_pci driver fails due to a "so-called" IRQ >>> conflict. (see below) >>> >>> However, it seems the IRQ (12) is not assigned, so this shouldn't be a >>> problem [**]? > > [...] >>> Any hints on how to debug this? We've already tried everything >>> described in the FAQ (I guess), but we don't understand there's a >>> conflict even if nothing is listed in /proc/interrupts? >> >> There are two CAN controllers on the card, right? Therefore you need >> support for shared interrupts. Actually, requesting the IRQ 12 for the >> second CAN controller fails because it's already used by the first one. > > Thx! (we've just found out ourselves that the difference in behaviour > between the 2 pc's was indeed due to different xenomai versions > (). Well, yes. Since commit 3291 http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/xenomai?rev=3291&view=rev the driver does not tolerate that failure any more. Do you prefer the old behavior (ignoring the failure and using just the first channel)? Wolfgang.