From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:19:24 +0000 Subject: Regression with legacy IRQ numbers caused by 9a1091ef0017 In-Reply-To: <20150115152838.GB18552@atomide.com> References: <20150114221407.GS2419@atomide.com> <20150115105035.GU11502@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150115152838.GB18552@atomide.com> Message-ID: <20150115171924.GV11502@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 07:28:39AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Russell King - ARM Linux [150115 02:53]: > > I don't think we've proven a link there. While you're right that it > > causes the wrong interrupt to be claimed, I have two kernels here, > > both claim the same interrupt, one which is multi-platform and issues > > that strange warning, and one which targets only OMAP4 which doesn't. > > > > There's something else going on which causes the bus errors which we > > haven't found. > > I think it gets triggered if you enable PREEMPT. That's something which we can try to prove... build running now with CONFIG_PREEMPT=y -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.