From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758908AbYFGK7V (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 06:59:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754673AbYFGK7M (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 06:59:12 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]:65108 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752851AbYFGK7K (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 06:59:10 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:message-id; b=ajShY6rTxJTXk8lWMsyv2nEJB9x4cDDbshqgilswHjSFiT1XXb0QGNpNYg6AAvuk38 8NGcM+23UrJ2O8Q6vBuXLxEnTdY482oW4lj9Be8UyqfJgpTFVhxBAC9R5KYY5o2Ht2QT nGfUyoVB8ErOJsh/sFQqNUUe2/1/tnULCHp+w= From: Maxim Levitsky To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: ACPI: EC: GPE storm detected, disabling EC GPE Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 13:59:04 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: "Justin Mattock" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Starikovskiy References: <20080606235526.783acc83.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080606235526.783acc83.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806071359.04426.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday, 7 June 2008 09:55:26 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 06:21:54 +0000 "Justin Mattock" wrote: > > > Well; I was hoping it was going to be just an easy fix, but unfortunately > > changing > > if (atomic_read(&ec->irq_count) > 5) { > > to > > if (atomic_read(&ec->irq_count) > 20) { > > does seem to make the message disappear, for a while, probably at > > around three hours,(for me at least) then the message appeared again. > > :-( > > So leaving me back to the beginning of try to have a go at this. > > regards; > > I removed bugzilla from cc - that only works if there's [Bug 1234] in > the Subject:. > > I added linux-acpi to cc - this is an acpi problem. > > What Justin is mysteriously referring to here is: > > > : From: "Justin Mattock" > : To: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" > : Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > : Subject: GPE storm detected, disabling EC GPE > : Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 21:01:55 +0000 > : Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org > : > : FWIW I noticed a post where the person had changed 5 to 20, and it > : seemed to work for them; > : So with that in mind I decide to give that a go, here is the location: > : drivers/acpi/ec.c > : @@ -527,47 +488,51 @@ static u32 acpi_ec_gpe_handler(void *data) > : { > : acpi_status status = AE_OK; > : struct acpi_ec *ec = data; > : u8 state = acpi_ec_read_status(ec); > : > : pr_debug(PREFIX "~~~> interrupt\n"); > : atomic_inc(&ec->irq_count); > : - if (atomic_read(&ec->irq_count) > 5) { > : + if (atomic_read(&ec->irq_count) > 20) { > : pr_err(PREFIX "GPE storm detected, disabling EC GPE\n"); > : ec_switch_to_poll_mode(ec); > : goto end; > : } > : > : Now I don't know if this will work for other brands, but for > : me(Macbook Pro ATI chipset) I have not received the > : GPE storm detected, disabling EC GPE message, but it's only been an > : hour, maybe after two or three this might appear. > : Also is this good or bad to set 5 to 20 for the system? > > Could someone from acpi land please help here? > > Justin, has this machine always had this problem or is it something > which earlier kernels handled correctly? > > Thanks. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > I have acer aspire 5720G which shows this message in latest -git but doesn't show it in ubuntu 2.6.24 kernel. I also noticed that in -git volume wheel behaves strangely, it sometimes increases volume when I rotate it in direction of decrease, and vise versa. Since the EC is in charge of volume wheel, it could be related. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky