Re: irq nobody cared error

[Dinesh <dbhat@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for your email. interrupt handler correctly returns IRQ_HANDLED 
and IRQ_NONE. I was checking the conditions for which IRQ gets disabled 
in spurios.c and the condition says if (desc->irqs_unhandled > 99900) 
disable and kill irq and that is precisely what is happening. So, from 
my understanding my card generates a lot of interrupts upon opening up 
the device and the kernel disables it.

I may be wrong in my understanding of the code. Perhaps, a kernel guy 
may be able to answer my questions.

Regards,

Dinesh


black hole wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 11/1/06, *Dinesh* <dbhat@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:dbhat@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks for your reply. Yes, our driver is programmed to share irqs.
>     SA_SHIRQ is used.
>
>     Dinesh
>
>
> Ok, I hope this helps a little bit more :) . Did you try a possibility 
> when your interrupt handling function always returned IRQ_HANDLED? Also, 
> did you have a look at the source code of these kernel functions ( 
> http://lxr.linux.no) - __do_IRQ(), handle_IRQ_event(), note_interrupt(), 
> __report_bad_irq and misrouted_irq()  ?
>
> I think that the __report_bad_irq() function is what produces the 
> "nobody cared" message and the note_interrupt() function is what
> prints the "Disabling IRQ" message.
>
> Just in case you would be looking for the term "spurious interrupt" -
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt>.
>
>
> BlackHole



--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ:           http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/