From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756693AbZEAK57 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 06:57:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754037AbZEAK5u (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 06:57:50 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:41098 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753559AbZEAK5u (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 06:57:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 11:57:34 +0100 From: Russell King To: Thomas Glexiner Cc: Linux Kernel List , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar Subject: 044d408409cc4e1bc75c886e27ca85c270db104c causes warnings Message-ID: <20090501105734.GA27799@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org People have been complaining about this new warning which has appeared, but unfortunately none of them seem to have reported this to the relevent people. I've just had someone else mention about this, so I guess I'm going to have to do the legwork for them... Adding the WARN_ONCE() in 044d408409cc4e1bc75c886e27ca85c270db104c causes warnings to appear on ARM. Eg, WARNING: at /build/linux/kernel/irq/handle.c:353 handle_IRQ_event+0x58/0xd8() BUG: IRQ handler called from non-hardirq context! Backtrace: [] (handle_IRQ_event+0x0/0xd8) from [] (handle_edge_irq+0x114/0x150) [] (handle_edge_irq+0x0/0x150) from [] (resend_irqs+0x48/0x80) [] (resend_irqs+0x0/0x80) from [] (tasklet_action+0x88/0xe0) [] (tasklet_action+0x0/0xe0) from [] (__do_softirq+0x68/0x104) to which tglx said: --- Day changed Mon Mar 30 2009 17:03 < tglx> rmk: hmpf 17:44 < rmk> tglx: seems to be nicely reproducable when accessing stuff via a PCMCIA NE2K NIC on PXA 17:44 < tglx> sure 17:44 < tglx> I know why it triggers 17:45 < tglx> darn 17:53 < tglx> the warn_once is crap when you use the resend mechanism, which runs in a tasklet :( So the question is: what's happening about this? -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: