FYI, since upgrading to 8.0-PRERELEASE on Oct 30, there have been no
interrupt storms.
I was about to email exactly the same thing today :) This bug is
not present on 8.0 as far as I can make out. Nice work.
-pete.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Pete French wrote:
Oh FFS! This morning I sent the following email..
Six months is a long gap! I was hooinh the problem had gone away. I
havent seen it on here since I started running 7.2-STABLE, and
before that I made it go away by using a debug kernel.
...and within an hour of typing that
The problem returns:
Jul 6 20:12:10 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on irq22:;
throttling interrupt source
Six months is a long gap! I was hooinh the problem had gone away. I
havent seen it on here since I started running 7.2-STABLE, and
before that I made it go away by using a debug
Oh FFS! This morning I sent the following email..
Six months is a long gap! I was hooinh the problem had gone away. I
havent seen it on here since I started running 7.2-STABLE, and
before that I made it go away by using a debug kernel.
...and within an hour of typing that I also started
Dan Langille wrote:
On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE,
but storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on
Dan Langille wrote:
I shall try the hw.acpi.osname=Linux option now.
From dmsg: Jan 22 18:10:07 polo kernel: ACPI: Overriding _OS
definition with Linux
it works for me for 3 days, 16:27 and still no sign of interrupt
storm. and emu10kx0 generates as many as 93 interrupt per second
without
Dan Langille wrote:
On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE,
but storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on
On Jan 23, 2009, at 2:34 PM, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -
STABLE, but
On Jan 23, 2009, at 2:34 PM, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -
STABLE, but
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any device.
if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will
On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE,
but storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on
any device. if any
Pete French wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any device.
if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will arrive.
Yes, I just got another storm, on my ATA controller this time. Ah
Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
Pete French wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any
device. if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will
arrive.
Yes, I just got another storm, on my ATA
Dan Langille wrote:
Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
Pete French wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any
device. if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will
arrive.
Yes, I just got
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any device.
if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will arrive.
Yes, I just got
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any device.
if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will arrive.
Yes, I just got another storm, on my ATA controller this time. Ah
well, so much for
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:52:34 +, Pete French
petefre...@ticketswitch.com wrote:
trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, but
storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any device.
if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will arrive.
Dan Langille wrote:
Pete French wrote:
kernel: interrupt storm detected on irq22:; throttling interrupt
source
Opening the case, reading the m/b:
K9A2 Platinum MSI
I hadnt been paying much attention to this thread, but just to let you
know that I also saw the same thing on this
Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
Pete French wrote:
kernel: interrupt storm detected on irq22:; throttling
interrupt source
Opening the case, reading the m/b:
K9A2 Platinum MSI
I hadnt been paying much attention to this thread, but just to let you
know that I also
19 matches
Mail list logo
