From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <384E9672.7632BAB9@amberdata.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 17:33:38 +0000 From: David Monro MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linuxppc-workstation@lists.linuxppc.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: IRQ problems on IBM 850 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Sorry to reply so late, but I went on holiday. Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Hollis R Blanchard wrote: > [..] > > Using interrupt 13 is strange, to say the least. It was reserved for FPU > errors on x86 processors. In your case obviously the interrupts are > expected (since you have a timeout) but have stayed masked for some > reason. We have to find where this happens. Some code paths might have an > unbalanced enable/disable_irq but I suspect that it will be hard to find. > Umm. Possible data point which may help here - I cannot cause my machine to do anything silly unless I hit two interrupt sources at the same time. I can compile kernels on the IDE disk (irq 13) till the cows come home if I don't have the ethernet enabled and don't play with the mouse too much. If I enable the ethernet (irq 15 I think), or play with the mouse a lot (irq 12), sooner or later I die. My (very uneducated) guess is that it has something to do with getting two interrupts in a very short space of time. I guess I should try thrashing one of the lower 8 interrupts (serial mouse I guess would do it) and see if that can cause problems, or whether it is restricted to the second controller. [..] Cheers, David ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/