Re: [RFC] suggested fix for 83xx/85xx PowerPC UART break bug
- From: Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:31:43 -0500
On Jul 31, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
This is something I'd tripped over earlier, and wanted to follow up on
to get an acceptable fix in for everyone's benefit before it falls through
the cracks again.
There seems to be an issue with recent 83xx/85xx SOC UARTs, in which a break
triggers a short lived IRQ storm (hence killing any hope of using SysRQ).
The only fix I found to work was to just ignore the bogus events that
had the associated signature bit set.
This fix is what I was using against earlier kernels, but I hate to add more
board/arch specific ifdefs to files like 8250.c, so I'm wondering if
anyone has any other suggestions before I simply end up cleaning up the
boardlist (now ppc is dead) and respinning the patch much as it is now
and resending.
How did you test this or generate it? I was thinking about this the other day and figured we need to try and track this down with the HW guys. If we can generate a simple test I can try and run it through the various boards/parts we have and see which ones show the issue and which dont.
- k
--
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:
- [RFC] suggested fix for 83xx/85xx PowerPC UART break bug
- From: Paul Gortmaker
- [RFC] suggested fix for 83xx/85xx PowerPC UART break bug
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] A development process document, V2
- Next by Date: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 30
- Previous by thread: [RFC] suggested fix for 83xx/85xx PowerPC UART break bug
- Next by thread: [PATCH] fix order calculation in dma_mark_declared_memory_occupied()
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
