From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751238AbWFTFOc (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:14:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751241AbWFTFOc (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:14:32 -0400 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:26773 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751238AbWFTFOb (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:14:31 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Andrew Morton Cc: mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de Subject: Re: The i386 and x86_64 genirq patches are wrong! References: <20060614070353.GA11896@elte.hu> <20060619144150.51fe627c.akpm@osdl.org> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:13:58 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20060619144150.51fe627c.akpm@osdl.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:41:50 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton writes: > ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: >> >> Ingo Molnar writes: >> >> > here too it's hard for me to give an answer without seeing your specific >> > changes (against whatever base is most convenient to you). MSI certainly >> > works fine on current -mm. (at least on my box) >> >> Ok. Looking closer. I have found a clear functional bug. >> >> When CONFIG_PCI_MSI is not set. >> move_irq expands to move_native_irq. >> >> ack_ioapic_vector >> move_native_irq >> ack_ioapic_irq >> move_irq >> move_native_irq >> >> ack_ioapic_quirk_vector >> move_native_irq >> ack_ioapic_quirk_irq >> move_irq >> move_native_irq >> >> So we wind up calling move_native_irq twice when MSI is disabled where >> before your conversion we only ever called it once. Luckily in >> the case where we have the double call vector_to_irq is a noop so >> we only migration the same irq twice. >> > > OK, but this doesn't seem to answer Ingo's request "could you please send > that fix to me, against whatever base you have it tested on, and i'll merge > it to genirq/irqchips [and fix up genirq if needed]. Please also include a > description of the problem. How common is that edge retrigger problem, and > how come this has never been seen in the past years since we had > irqbalance?" > > The genirq patches are stuck in limboland until issues like this are > resolved. I'm not planning on sending them to Linus for 2.6.18 so there's > no huge rush on it, but it would be nice to get all these loose ends tied > off reasonably promptly, please. Should be in the morning. The patches are ready I just need to make certain I copy all of the appropriate people, add signed-off-by lines, etc. The reason for the delay was that I didn't have a convenient base. I had a development effort that as it's final product turned up a bug. I think everything is in good shape but I don't trust myself until I slept on it all. My patches are incremental against 2.6.17-rc6-mm2 as that turned out to be the easiest place to start. Eric