> On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Sunday 16 August 2009 16:25:13 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 16 August 2009 15:22:29 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > + if (0&&unlikely(desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED)) {
> > > > >
> > > > > So the interrupt is marked disabled. How do you setup the handler
> > > > > ? And what does the primary handler do ? Can you post your driver
> > > > > code please?
> > > >
> > > > This patch converts the b43 driver to threaded interrupts:
> > > >
http://bu3sch.de/patches/wireless-testing/20090816-1535/patches/002-b43-threaded-irq-h...
> > >
> > > On the first glance this looks not too bad. the unlocked access to the
> > > irq status registers looks a bit scary, but that is not relevant for
> > > the problem at hand.
> >
> > Yeah it does ;)
> >
> > > > It kind of works with this hack applied to kernel/irq/manage.c
> > >
> > > Hmm. Is the interrupt of the device shared ?
> >
> > It's registered as shared, but on my machine it is not shared with anything else.
> >
> > > If yes, what's the other
> > > device on that interrupt line ? what puzzles me is the fact that the
> > > IRQ_DISABLED flag is set. Is there anything unusual in dmesg ?
> >
> > Here's my current kernel log with the two patches applied:
> >
http://bu3sch.de/misc/dmesg
>
> Hmm. Nothing interesting AFAICT, but it would be really interesting to
> find out why the IRQ_DISABLED flag is set.
>
> Can you add some debug into disable_irq() e.g. WARN_ON(irq ==
> BC43_IRQ_NR); so we can see what disables that interrupt.
