Re: 2.6.20-rc7: known regressions (v2) (part 1)

["Adam Kropelin" <akropel1@rochester.rr.com>]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com> writes:
>> None of the MSI code in e1000 has changed significantly either. as
>> far as I can see, the msi code in e1000 has not changed since
>> 2.6.18. Nonetheless there's no way I can debug any of this without a
>> system.
>> [...]
>> Perhaps Adam can git-bisect this issue? Adam?
>
> Do we have any explanation about the weird /proc/interrupts output?
> i.e. Multiple MSI irqs being assigned to the same card?
>
> Does /sbin/ifconfig ethN down ; /sbin/ifconfig ethN up have anything
> to do with the duplication in /proc/interrupts?
>
> I can't see any way for a pci device that doesn't support msi-x to be
> assigned multiple interrupts simultaneously.
>
> I just skimmed through the code and there hasn't been any significant
> generic MSI work since 2.6.19.
>
> Did this device really work with MSI enabled in 2.6.19?

I've never had this device work 100% with MSI on any kernel version I've 
tested so far. But I'm not the original reporter of the problem, and I 
believe for him it was a true regression where a previous kernel wored 
correctly.

The behavior I observe on 2.6.19 is better than 2.6.20-rc7. Link status 
interrupts seem to work but rx/tx does not. A few more details here:
<http://www.kroptech.com/~adk0212/mailimport/showmsg.php?msg_id=3339092450&db_name=linux_kernel>

I'm going to test 2.6.16 thru 2.6.20-rc7 this weekend and will report 
back any variations in behavior I notice.

--Adam