On Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 11:24:07 +0100, Cedric Roux wrote:
> (I just tried a boot without CONFIG_HANDLE_SEGMENTS, it crashed,
> I did not try to know why.)
Probably because Linux tries to use it and the kernel rejects it.
> It would be nice to have some infos about this issue, though,
> just to u
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Adam Lackorzynski wrote:
> On Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 10:40:17 +0100, Cedric Roux wrote:
>
> I know, but haven't found time yet to look deeper into it. Something
> broke, that's sure. Disabling TLS could help for the time being (rm -r
> /lib/tls...).
L4Linux is there, thanks.
T
On Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 10:40:17 +0100, Cedric Roux wrote:
> Maybe you can test this specific case and not call switch_to_irq_idle_loop
> when the calling thread is the IRQ one?
I guess that's broken then, I'll look into it.
> Now, I have some General Protection Faults occuring at l4linux boot tim
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Adam Lackorzynski wrote:
> > My questions are:
> > 1 - why to call this switch_to_irq_idle_loop? what's
> > the purpose of it?
>
> The purpose is to prevent that interrupts get through. The tricky part
> here has been IRQ probing. I guess I need to reevaluate this iss
On Fri Feb 11, 2005 at 20:05:31 +0100, Cedric Roux wrote:
> ethernet card (ne2k-pci) sends an IRQ (number 9).
> The IRQ thread passes wait_for_irq_message_hw then calls do_IRQ.
> do_IRQ does its stuff, then calls irq_exit.
>
> In irq_exit, we have a softirq pending (don't ask me why, that's just
>
Hi again L4 Hackers,
here is what's going on.
ethernet card (ne2k-pci) sends an IRQ (number 9).
The IRQ thread passes wait_for_irq_message_hw then calls do_IRQ.
do_IRQ does its stuff, then calls irq_exit.
In irq_exit, we have a softirq pending (don't ask me why, that's just
the way it is), so
