so far, so good...
If you have other things to test, let me know. This machine seems
to be a "bad actor" due to 4 processors, which seem to be able to
excite bugs that 2 processor machines don't notice... I'm par-
ticularly interested in the eepro100.c code to see how it responds,
as it had some serious problems in 2.1.96'ish kernels with large
file transfers and NFS going on at the same time...
Robert Hyatt Computer and Information Sciences
hyatt@cis.uab.edu University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213 115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
(205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
On Mon, 27 Apr 1998, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> could everyone involved with this discussion please check out:
>
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/testing/
> pre-patch-2.1.99-1.gz
>
> which is a cleanup of my previous patches wrt irq handling, and also fixes
> a real bug (we used to ACK the io-apic outside the irq-controller lock,
> which meant that the ack's we did and "ipi_pending[]" might have gotten
> out of sync - which could certainly have resulted in bad behaviour).
>
> This also re-enables the code that replays interrupts in enable_irq(),
> because it should be ok now that the rest of the code is cleaned up.
> People that had the earlier problem with locking up with floppies, please
> test: if this re-introduces the lockup, please just #if 0 out all the code
> inside trigger_pending_irqs(), and send me a note telling me that that
> code still doesn't work.
>
> Linus
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu