Re: Problems with MSI-X on ia64
- From: Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:37:34 -0800
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 02:37:14PM -0600, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Grundler, Grant G
> > > We're using a 2.6.9 variant and a cciss driver with
> > MSI/MSI-X support.
> > > The kernel has MSI enabled. On ia64 the MSI-X table is all zeroes.
> >
> > Could you post the debug output you've collected so far?
>
> There are 2 MSI-X capable controllers in the system. On IPF this is what
> the tables look like:
>
> cciss: offset = 0xfe000 table offset = 0xfe000 BIR = 0x0
> cciss: 0: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 1: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 2: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 3: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: using DAC cycles
> ACPI: PCI interrupt 0000:88:00.0[A] -> GSI 71 (level, low) -> IRQ 61
> cciss: MSI-X enabled
> cciss: offset = 0xfe000 table offset = 0xfe000 BIR = 0x0
> cciss: 0: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 1: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 2: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: 3: vector = 0,msg data = 0, msg upper addr = 0,msg addr = 0
> cciss: using DAC cycles
> blocks= 143305920 block_size= 512
> heads= 255, sectors= 32, cylinders= 17562
>
> blocks= 142130880 block_size= 512
> heads= 255, sectors= 32, cylinders= 17418
>
> cciss/c2d0:
>
> And this is where we hang, when enabling interrupts in the driver.
Can you try 2.6.15, or possibly 2.6.16-rc1-mm3?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- RE: Problems with MSI-X on ia64
- From: Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
- RE: Problems with MSI-X on ia64
- Prev by Date: Re: pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow)
- Next by Date: Re: [RT] possible bug in trace_start_sched_wakeup
- Previous by thread: RE: Problems with MSI-X on ia64
- Next by thread: RE: Problems with MSI-X on ia64
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|