Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:53:46 +0100 From: Pete French <pfrench@firstcallgroup.co.uk> To: holger.kipp@alogis.com Cc: frank@exit.com, pjklist@ekahuna.com, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Status of fxp / smp problem? Message-ID: <E17LM30-0001nX-00@mailhost.firstcallgroup.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3D12FBAB.8C676DA9@alogis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You have two drivers who have to react to the same IRQ, so maybe its some > sort of race condition... But thats more for developers, who know their > IRQs by heart <grin>. :-) is there any guide to how IRQ's are handled ? I had a thought - as I have a machine I can reproduce this on, plus I know exactly what IRQ it is and how many things should be run then maybe I could code in some very specific debugging code for my kernel and generate a panic the first time sym isnt checked when IRQ 15 is fired. Could do that by counting number of checked in the interrupt loop possibly ? > Hmm, looks like Gerard didn't have the time to polish his code yet > and commit it. I'd suggest we give him some more time before we complain, > as he also has a living ;-) Sorry, wasnt intended as a complaint - more that I didnt know if the workaround was actually intended to be committed or not, as the better solution would be to find and the actual bug, and not put a workaround into the code. -pcf. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E17LM30-0001nX-00>