Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:43:02 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Cc: "Douglas W. Goodall" <douglas_goodall@mac.com> Subject: Re: Stray irq7's Message-ID: <200607261443.03128.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <000001c6ae9a$cce42c20$6dce46c0@dougwide> References: <000001c6ae9a$cce42c20$6dce46c0@dougwide>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 23 July 2006 16:58, Douglas W. Goodall wrote: > I looked closely at the source code i386/intr_machdep.c and I can see that > the interrupt routine deals properly with the > Default IR7. The only trouble is, the code considers the stray Ir7 a > condition worth informing the user about and logging. > > IMHO, it would be better to just take care of it quietly. It isn't an > important event and isn't worthy of bothering > the root user. I commented out the logging code and everything works fine. See my other e-mail. The IRR check is done in the atpic-specific code in i386/isa/atpic.c:atpic_handle_intr() that calls the intr_execute_handlers() function you are looking at. My guess is that he's getting noise from the printer that triggers real IRQ7 interrupts, but since the interrupt line is masked, those interrupts don't trigger. Later, a spurious interrupt results in an unmasked IRQ7, but since IRQ7 is marked as pending due to the earlier noise interrupt from the printer, the IRR check fails and it ends up in intr_execute_handlers(). If that is the case, either disconnecting the printer or getting the ppc(4) driver working will fix the messages. Either way it's probably harmless and not something the OP needs to worry about. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200607261443.03128.jhb>