Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)

From: Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com)
Date: Mon Nov 06 2000 - 04:00:08 EST

Next message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Linux 2.4 Status / TODO page (Updated as of 2.4.0-test10)"
Previous message: Szabolcs Szakacsits: "Re: Looking for better VM"
In reply to: Neil Brown: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Next in thread: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Reply: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Neil Brown wrote:
> It looks like an interupt is happening while another interrupt is
> happening, which should be impossible... but it isn't.

If multiple interrupts are hitting a single code path (like IDE irqs 14
-and- 15), you definitely have to think about that. The reentrancy
guarantee only exists when a single IRQ is assigned to a single
handler...

Jeff

-- 
Jeff Garzik             | Dinner is ready when
Building 1024           | the smoke alarm goes off.
MandrakeSoft            |	-/usr/games/fortune
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Linux 2.4 Status / TODO page (Updated as of 2.4.0-test10)"
Previous message: Szabolcs Szakacsits: "Re: Looking for better VM"
In reply to: Neil Brown: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Next in thread: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Reply: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Kernel 2.4.0test10 crash (RAID+SMP)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 21:00:18 EST