From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Justin Mattock" Subject: Re: [Bug #11552] Disabling IRQ #23 Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 16:16:42 -0700 Message-ID: References: <7lIhZC4hCxE.A.vqG.X0q1IB@albercik> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=C30NdTra9Di2e6fpXrXclqwCZqF1iBftUooSx2kcRis=; b=qcn5UFyTwA2SGN9/zPEjwaP6HJdYorMfM1xQxu08Lus1RS/aiLHPXWF12ovY2Mkir2 3XeIm67frkJpmax7nq/lx0rGMW3V2Orz9lMZWvC5zI6rq4Q5WJB2oby62EEHUQi7Sgzt gks9AyT/Bd6elR3Z7vsP3aGTrTNonABoxeqc0= In-Reply-To: <7lIhZC4hCxE.A.vqG.X0q1IB@albercik> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Alan Stern , David Brownell On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > of recent regressions. > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know > (either way). > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11552 > Subject : Disabling IRQ #23 > Submitter : Justin Mattock > Date : 2008-09-09 19:08 (13 days old) > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122098735230906&w=4 > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122107367715361&w=4 > Handled-By : David Brownell > Alan Stern > Patch : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122187222705195&w=4 > > > not sure if it should be; >From over here, I did a bad install of isight-firmware-tools, causing hal and udev to clash. After making sure the package was either using hal or udev, there is no message of disable irq #23. If its not too much trouble is there a way to verify that this was the case, i.g. if udev creates a dev, then hal creates the same device will this cause ehci_hcd to have messages of this kind? If so then thats what happened, if not then theres something else causing this. -- Justin P. Mattock