On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:43:43PM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
> 2007/8/10, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > (..)
> > I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
> > Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
> > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37
2007/8/10, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> (..)
> I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
> Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
I think I already tested this patch, but this thread is sooo big and I
* Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All correct! There was also checked a possibility it can be not hw
> itself, but wrong way of handling after hw (acking too late). This was
> false idea (or bad implementation), so it looks like hw vs lapic
> problem.
i think the problem is that
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:08:33AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 10-08-2007 10:05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > ...
> > > But suppressing the resend is not fixing the driver problem. The
> > > problem can show up with spurious interrupts and
* Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10-08-2007 10:05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> ...
> > But suppressing the resend is not fixing the driver problem. The
> > problem can show up with spurious interrupts and with interrupts on
> > a shared PCI interrupt line at any time. It just
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:48:41AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
> > ...
> > > I was still testing on -rc2:
> > > Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered
* Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
> ...
> > I was still testing on -rc2:
> > Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
> > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
> >
> > For me after
> For me it's enough too but Thomas seems to doubt.
>
> You've written earlier that you've 2.6.23-rc1 with HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND
> prepared too. So, if this is not a great problem maybe you could try
> this first. Tomorrow Thomas may send something, so this 100HZ could
> wait yet, I hope?
Ok, i'll
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
...
> I was still testing on -rc2:
> Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
>
> For me after 1day 20hours, the network is still up, with more than 1To
> of
> So, we still have to wait for the exact explanation...
>
> Thanks very much Marcin!
>
> I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
> Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
>
> If it's not a great problem it
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 08:33:27AM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
> 2007/8/9, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
...
> > diff -Nurp 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2.6.23-rc1/kernel/irq/chip.c
> > --- 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2007-07-09 01:32:17.0 +0200
> > +++
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 08:33:27AM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
2007/8/9, Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
...
diff -Nurp 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2.6.23-rc1/kernel/irq/chip.c
--- 2.6.23-rc1-/kernel/irq/chip.c 2007-07-09 01:32:17.0 +0200
+++ 2.6.23-rc1/kernel/irq/chip.c
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:08:33AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10-08-2007 10:05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
...
But suppressing the resend is not fixing the driver problem. The
problem can show up with spurious interrupts and with interrupts
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:48:41AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
...
I was still testing on -rc2:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
...
I was still testing on -rc2:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
For me after 1day 20hours, the network is still up, with more than 1To
of
So, we still have to wait for the exact explanation...
Thanks very much Marcin!
I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
If it's not a great problem it would be
For me it's enough too but Thomas seems to doubt.
You've written earlier that you've 2.6.23-rc1 with HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND
prepared too. So, if this is not a great problem maybe you could try
this first. Tomorrow Thomas may send something, so this 100HZ could
wait yet, I hope?
Ok, i'll test
* Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:15:53AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Vignaud wrote:
...
I was still testing on -rc2:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
For me after 1day 20hours,
* Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10-08-2007 10:05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
...
But suppressing the resend is not fixing the driver problem. The
problem can show up with spurious interrupts and with interrupts on
a shared PCI interrupt line at any time. It just might take
* Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All correct! There was also checked a possibility it can be not hw
itself, but wrong way of handling after hw (acking too late). This was
false idea (or bad implementation), so it looks like hw vs lapic
problem.
i think the problem is that local
2007/8/10, Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(..)
I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
I think I already tested this patch, but this thread is sooo big and I
can't
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:43:43PM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
2007/8/10, Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(..)
I think, there is this one possible for your testing yet?:
Subject: [patch] genirq: temporary fix for level-triggered IRQ resend
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:00:37 +0200
I think
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:42:43PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> Read below please:
>
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:09:36PM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
> > 2007/8/7, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > So, the let's try this idea yet: modified Ingo's "x86: activate
> > >
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:42:43PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
Read below please:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:09:36PM +0200, Marcin Ślusarz wrote:
2007/8/7, Jarek Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So, the let's try this idea yet: modified Ingo's x86: activate
HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND patch.
24 matches
Mail list logo
