ohci1394 regression in 2.6.19-rc1 (was Re: Merge window closed: v2.6.19-rc1)

Stefan Richter
2006-10-05T18:57:49Z

Alistair John Strachan wrote:
> Booted fine here, but I've got a few strange messages from the firewire
> subsystem that weren't present in 2.6.18. I think it marginally slows down
> boot up, but I could just be imagining it.
>
> [alistair] 16:04 [~] dmesg | grep 1394
> ohci1394: fw-host0: OHCI-1394 1.1 (PCI): IRQ=[19] MMIO=[dffff000-dffff7ff] Max Packet=[2048] IR/IT contexts=[4/8]
> ohci1394: fw-host1: OHCI-1394 1.1 (PCI): IRQ=[17] MMIO=[dfffc000-dfffc7ff] Max Packet=[2048] IR/IT contexts=[4/8]
> ohci1394: fw-host0: Running dma failed because Node ID is not valid
> ohci1394: fw-host0: AT dma reset ctx=0, aborting transmission
> ieee1394: Current remote IRM is not 1394a-2000 compliant, resetting...
> ieee1394: Host added: ID:BUS[0-00:1023] GUID[00023c0091023fd7]
> ieee1394: Host added: ID:BUS[1-00:1023] GUID[000129200003d023]

Thanks for the quick report. Could you please test the following, each
one separately?

A. Configure PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE=n

B. Revert patch "Initialize ieee1394 early when built in"
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=8df4083c5291b3647e0381d3c69ab2196f5dd3b7

I don't see how any other ohci1394 patch after 2.6.18 could lead up to
that message. I also don't understand what causes this glitch. At least
it seems recoverable, according to the "Host added" lines.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- =-=- --=-=