Re: Lockups - lost interrupt

yodaiken@chelm.cs.nmt.edu
Sun, 12 Sep 1999 20:55:15 -0600

There are parts of the new irq.c that are not obviously there to support
RTLinux. Please don't chop em. Especially important is: the functions
in the low level handler structure do not invoke any spinlocks and
there are labels on the low level irq catch code that allow the RTL
module to patch to take control.

On Sun, Sep 12, 1999 at 10:17:04AM +0200, mingo@chiara.csoma.elte.hu wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 11 Sep 1999, Wade Hampton wrote:
> >
> > >Dumb question -- where can I get the ikd patch? I could put it on the
> >
> > ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/andrea/kernel-patches/ikd/2.2.12-ikd1.gz
> >
> > Right now enable _only_ the NMI oopser and wait for a stack trace.
>
> FYI, i'm working on a patch for 2.3 that adds the NMI oopser (optionally,
> because 1) it doesnt work on all SMP boxes, and 2) it forces the timer irq
> to the BP) to the 2.3 kernel. Looks like one of the most common uses of
> IKD is lockup detection - the rest is mostly used by kernel hackers. I'll
> post it together with some other x86 APIC fixes and irq cleanups soon.
>
> -- mingo
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/