Re: Possible critical VIA vt82c686a chip bug (private question)

Vojtech Pavlik
2000-10-26T20:17:20Z

On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 10:11:54PM +0200, Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:

> > > > > ../drivers/block/ide.c, line 162, on version 2.2.17 does bad things
> > > > > to the timer. It writes 0 to the control-word for timer 0. This
> > > > > does the following:
> > > [Snipped...]
> > > >
> > > > Well, at least on 2.4.0-test9, the above timing code is #ifed to
> > > > DISK_RECOVERY_TIME > 0, which in turn is #defined to 0 in
> > > > include/linux/ide.h.
> > > >
> > > > So this is not our problem here. Anyway I guess it's time to hunt for
> > > > i8259 accesses in the kernel that lack the necessary spinlock, even when
> > > > they're not probably the cause of the problem we see here.
> > >
> > > Okay, good.
> >
> > Ok, here is a list of places within the kernel that access the PIT
> > timer, plus the method of locking (i386 arch only):
>
> [...]
>
> Ok, I just tested if the problem was always present without
> the IDE subsystem...
>
> The answer is it is not... so it isn't an IDE problem.

Uh, guess too many negations. You wanted to say that the problem was
present even when you disabled the IDE subsystem, right?

So now it seems that possibly enough PCI traffic / busmastering traffic
can cause the problem ...