From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757490AbZA2Ntf (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:49:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751644AbZA2NtZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:49:25 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:49619 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751289AbZA2NtY (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:49:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:49:16 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Jean Delvare Cc: Stephen Hemminger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [bug] CONFIG_I2C_VIAPRO=y breaks skge Message-ID: <20090129134916.GK24391@elte.hu> References: <20090127151359.GA20369@elte.hu> <20090127162729.50cd2e61@hyperion.delvare> <20090127154410.GA24470@elte.hu> <20090127182631.13568383@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090127182631.13568383@hyperion.delvare> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Jean Delvare wrote: > > > What I2C chip drivers did you include in your kernel? Presumably > > > this is a random config, so I can imagine that there is a chip on > > > the SMBus to which an I2C chip driver would have bound and that is > > > causing the problem, rather than i2c-viapro itself. > > > > Correct, i found it via random config testing. x86 defconfig + VIAPRO > > enabled boots fine so it indeed could be interaction between i2c > > drivers. > > Is there anything like a x86 defconfig? I didn't know. [...] Yes. Type "make defconfig" in the kernel source top directory, on an x86 box. > > Anyway, this bug is not a big deal - i can work it around locally by > > excluding VIAPRO on that box. If you'd like to figure out why this > > happens that would be preferred of course, and i can send any debug > > info you need. > > Well my guess is that you have included an I2C chip driver with a weak > detection routine. More likely this is a typical case of "if it hurts, > don't do it". But maybe we can improve the help text or default, or even > disable probing for these devices. > > At this point I am reasonably certain that the i2c-viapro driver is > innocent. i've excluded the VIAPRO driver on that box (and only the VIAPRO driver - i.e. all those other I2C drivers still run frequently) - and the problem has not reoccured in about ~1000 bootups. Combined with the fact that this box has a VIA chipset, does that not implicate the viapro driver, at least to a certain degree? Ingo