Re: tg3 - irq #: nobody cared!

[Andrew Morton]

"David S. Miller" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2003-05-06 at 15:03, john stultz wrote:
> > 	Not sure if this is the proper fix, but it stops the kernel from
> > complaining. I saw Andrew suggest something similar for a sound driver.
> 
> Definitely not the right fix.  If the hardware status struct
> indicates no event is pending, then we return 0 since we
> didn't "handle" the interrupt.

This is about the fifth report of unhandled interrupts.  Against the fifth
driver which looks to be correct.

So I'd be suspecting the scenario which Alan outlined: the IRQ handler looped
around, scooped up the interrupt source before the APIC delivered the IRQ.

I'm working on the actual detection code - it tries to filter out the false
positives.

Suggest we ignore these reports until that is sorted out.