From: Johannes Stezenbach <js@sig21.net>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Hans Werner <HWerner4@gmx.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, trenn@suse.de, mmalygin@ked.de,
hancockrwd@gmail.com, greg@kroah.com
Subject: Re: Samsung N130 ATA exception after 5min uptime -- Phoenix FailSafe issue?
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 01:41:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100104004147.GA19558@sig21.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B41216F.4070906@kernel.org>
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 07:59:59AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On 01/04/2010 07:11 AM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I just tested a current git kernel (v2.6.33-rc2-268-g45d28b0)
> > with Tejun's patch applied on my N130. The ATA exception and hang is
> > indeed gone, just "ata1: clearing spurious IRQ" is logged.
> >
> > I've see Tejun's comment in
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14314
> > and I would like to add that the ATA irq is not shared.
> >
> > 14: 43885 0 IO-APIC-edge ata_piix
> > 15: 0 0 IO-APIC-edge ata_piix
>
> Can you please post that on bug#14314? If the IRQ line indeed wasn't
> shared, it might mean that the controller raised the IRQ line before
> getting its internal state in order and the IRQ checking sequence
> cleared the external IRQ status while leaving the internal pending bit
> intact, which I've never heard of on piix and don't think is possible.
> Hmmmm... given that the problem was dependent on BIOS on the other
> model (is it the N130?), maybe the BIOS is doing something funny. :-(
> Anyways, please post full output of "cat /proc/interrupts" at the bz.
I've updated bug#14314. It is certainly a BIOS issue, but the
"spurious IRQ" check deals way better with it than the previous
30sec hang waiting for timeout. IMHO the patch should be merged
into mainline asap. Or do you think it has any downside?
Thanks
Johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-04 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-30 12:04 Samsung N130 ATA exception after 5min uptime -- Phoenix FailSafe issue? Hans Werner
2010-01-03 22:11 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2010-01-03 22:59 ` Tejun Heo
2010-01-04 0:41 ` Johannes Stezenbach [this message]
2010-01-04 0:56 ` Tejun Heo
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-11-26 16:42 Johannes Stezenbach
2009-11-28 19:19 ` Greg KH
2009-11-28 20:30 ` Robert Hancock
2009-11-28 21:34 ` Greg KH
2009-11-28 22:22 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2009-11-29 0:17 ` Greg KH
2009-11-29 0:51 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2009-11-30 8:52 ` Tejun Heo
2009-11-30 10:21 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2009-11-30 11:06 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100104004147.GA19558@sig21.net \
--to=js@sig21.net \
--cc=HWerner4@gmx.de \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hancockrwd@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mmalygin@ked.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=trenn@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox