Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 119815 - acpi: Interrupt routing for e100 broken
Summary: acpi: Interrupt routing for e100 broken
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: rawhide
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Arjan van de Ven
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FC2Target
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2004-04-02 10:41 UTC by Alex Kiernan
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:10 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-04-08 16:53:29 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
/proc/interrupts from a 2.6.3-2.1.253.2.1smp kernel (the working one) (deleted)
2004-04-02 19:14 UTC, Alex Kiernan 		no flags Details
/proc/interrupts from a 2.6.4-1.303smp kernel (a broken one) (deleted)
2004-04-03 10:20 UTC, Alex Kiernan 		no flags Details
Comparison between startup messages (deleted)
2004-04-05 20:33 UTC, Alex Kiernan 		no flags Details
Boot messages from 2.6.4-1.305 (deleted)
2004-04-06 12:41 UTC, Alex Kiernan 		no flags Details
View All

Description Alex Kiernan 2004-04-02 10:41:13 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6)
Gecko/20040312 Epiphany/1.1.12

Description of problem:
Using 2.6.4-1.300 with a dual e100 card, no interrupts get delivered
and the card doesn't work - the card gets routed to to 14.

Falling back to 2.6.3-2.1.253.2.1, the interrupt gets routed to 138,
interrupts get delivered and the card works.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-smp-2.6.4-1.300

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install & Configure e100 card
2.
3.
    

Additional info:
Comment 1 Sahil Verma 2004-04-02 17:56:25 UTC 
Please post /proc/interrupts from both kernels.
Comment 2 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-02 19:14:08 UTC 
Created attachment 99079 [details]
/proc/interrupts from a 2.6.3-2.1.253.2.1smp kernel (the working one)

eth0 and eth1 are e100s on a dual card, eth2 is an e1000
Comment 3 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-03 10:20:43 UTC 
Created attachment 99085 [details]
/proc/interrupts from a 2.6.4-1.303smp kernel (a broken one)

eth0, eth1 are the dual e100, eth2 the e1000
Comment 4 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-05 09:06:33 UTC 
Swapping the dual e100 for a quad tulip has the same problems, so it 
doesn't look like the problem is directly related to the NIC in use.
Comment 5 Arjan van de Ven 2004-04-05 09:09:45 UTC 
what kind of motherboard is this ?
Comment 6 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-05 09:17:42 UTC 
Its a Dell Precision 450 w/ dual 2.6GHz Xeons - according to Dell's 
web site its an Intel E7505 chipset with 533MHz system bus.
Comment 7 Sahil Verma 2004-04-05 17:30:25 UTC 
Any irq related errors in /var/log/messages?
Comment 8 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-05 20:00:41 UTC 
Only lots of:

Apr  2 08:43:26 alexk kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth1: transmit timed 
out
Apr  2 08:43:26 alexk kernel: e100: eth1: e100_watchdog: link up, 
100Mbps, full-duplex

Nothing else I can see.
Comment 9 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-05 20:33:35 UTC 
Created attachment 99122 [details]
Comparison between startup messages

This is the result of diffing the two sets of startup messages
Comment 10 Sahil Verma 2004-04-06 02:19:43 UTC 
2.6.4 is causing a horrible interrupt storm, maybe the ehci-hcd driver
is buggy. Please boot with that module disabled and post dmesg.
Comment 11 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-06 12:41:57 UTC 
Created attachment 99137 [details]
Boot messages from 2.6.4-1.305

This is with ehci-hcd disabled - unfortunately its no better in respect of the
interrupt problem - the dual e100 still doesn't work.
Comment 12 Alex Kiernan 2004-04-07 07:43:17 UTC 
Just rebuilt 2.6.4-1.305 with the patch from attachment id=2481 from
http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2409 - this fixes the problem.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.