From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 07:47:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 07:47:03 -0400 Received: from 64-42-29-14.atgi.net ([64.42.29.14]:62982 "HELO mail.clouddancer.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 07:46:57 -0400 To: Dylan_G@bigfoot.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Annoying kernel behaviour In-Reply-To: <9h4ft5$1ku$1@ns1.clouddancer.com> In-Reply-To: <3B33EFC0.D9C930D5@bigfoot.com> <9h0r6s$fe7$1@ns1.clouddancer.com> <20010623090542.6019D7846F@mail.clouddancer.com> <3B35C2FA.37F57964@bigfoot.com> <9h4ft5$1ku$1@ns1.clouddancer.com> Reply-To: klink@clouddancer.com Message-Id: <20010624114655.3D187784C4@mail.clouddancer.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 04:46:55 -0700 (PDT) From: klink@clouddancer.com (Colonel) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In clouddancer.list.kernel, you wrote: >bttv0: Bt848 (rev 18) at 00:0f.0, irq: 10, latency: 64, memory: 0xd79ff000 > ** ^^ this worked in 2.2.19 as >bttv0: Brooktree Bt848 (rev 18) bus: 0, devfn: 88, irq: 11, memory: > >It shouldn't matter, as userspace programs should not be able te fuck te >kernel over in such a complete instant deadlock. There is something Ah, notice that the IRQ shifted? Perhaps there is something else on irq 10, such as the SCSI controller? My video cards always end up on that IRQ, perhaps the computer is still accessible via the network? -- "Or heck, let's just make the VM a _real_ Neural Network, that self trains itself to the load you put on the system. Hideously complex and evil? Well, why not wire up that roach on the floor, eating that stale cheese doodle. It can't do any worse job on VM that some of the VM patches I've seen..." -- Jason McMullan ditto