* Vivek Goyal <[email protected]> [2007-05-17 15:05]:
> On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 04:05:15PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> > * Vivek Goyal <[email protected]> [2007-05-08 19:18]:
> > > On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 12:19:32AM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> > > > * Vivek Goyal <[email protected]> [2007-04-30 10:48]:
> > > > >
> > > > > handle_edge_irq() already makes sure that desc->action is not null, still
> > > > > note_interrupt() is receiving desc->action as null, that's strange. On my
> > > > > system this is happening for irq 4 and /proc/interrupt shows that it is
> > > > > coming from "serial".
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, I couldn't reproduce this here. Vivek, do you have time
> > > > to take a look at this at your site? For the meanwhile, should I
> > > > create a patch that checks for desc->action in note_interrupt(), too?
> > >
> > > I can reproduce this problem only on one machine. I think there is some
> > > race condition and your code somehow just exposes it.
> >
> > thanks for finding that out. Could you try/review out the patch below?
> > As the lock is only aquired when irqfixup == 2 it shouldn't impact
> > performance of a 'normal' system.
>
> It does fix up my problem. I have modified your patch a bit. I think
> new version is little more clear. What do you think?
Aggreed. Thanks for spotting that problem out!
Bernhard
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
