On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 10:11:54PM +0200, Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:
> > > > > ../drivers/block/ide.c, line 162, on version 2.2.17 does bad things
> > > > > to the timer. It writes 0 to the control-word for timer 0. This
> > > > > does the following:
> > > [Snipped...]
> > > >
> > > > Well, at least on 2.4.0-test9, the above timing code is #ifed to
> > > > DISK_RECOVERY_TIME > 0, which in turn is #defined to 0 in
> > > > include/linux/ide.h.
> > > >
> > > > So this is not our problem here. Anyway I guess it's time to hunt for
> > > > i8259 accesses in the kernel that lack the necessary spinlock, even when
> > > > they're not probably the cause of the problem we see here.
> > >
> > > Okay, good.
> > Ok, here is a list of places within the kernel that access the PIT
> > timer, plus the method of locking (i386 arch only):
> Ok, I just tested if the problem was always present without
> the IDE subsystem...
> The answer is it is not... so it isn't an IDE problem.
Uh, guess too many negations. You wanted to say that the problem was
present even when you disabled the IDE subsystem, right?
So now it seems that possibly enough PCI traffic / busmastering traffic
can cause the problem ...
-- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:19 EST