Bug 3249 - Possible bug in acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler
Summary: Possible bug in acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler
Status: REJECTED DUPLICATE of bug 2934
Alias: None
Product: ACPI
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Config-Interrupts (show other bugs)
Hardware: i386 Linux
: P2 normal
Assignee: Luming Yu
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 2934
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2004-08-20 02:53 UTC by Christian Lupien
Modified: 2004-12-06 06:15 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Kernel Version: 2.6.7
Subsystem:
Regression: ---
Bisected commit-id:


Attachments

Description Christian Lupien 2004-08-20 02:53:57 UTC
Software Environment: kernel 2.6.7 +swsusp2+ acpi
Problem Description:
Will reading the code to find a a problem with gpe events on my system , I found
a possible bug with the way interupt handlers are installed. 

The interupts are installed with acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler (in osl.c).
This is used by acpi_ev_install_sci_handler (events/evsci.c) to install a
handler for sci interupts and it could also be called for another interupt pin
for extra gpe blocks (acpi_ev_get_gpe_xrupt_block in events/evgpeblk.c).

The way the handler is installed (using the global variable acpi_irq_handler in
osl.c) I think that if the second handler is installed this will overwrite the
first one.

Note that I don't have such a second handler so I don't know if this is really a
problem. I just find this weird.
Comment 1 Len Brown 2004-09-02 19:17:45 UTC
i haven't seen the 2nd handler used before either,
so if we had a bug here it wouldn't surprise me.
ie. maybe a bug in dead code...
Comment 2 Shaohua 2004-11-14 21:25:55 UTC
This isn't a bug. acpi_ev_get_gpe_xrupt_block will check if the new IRQ == 
fadt.sci. If yes, no new handler is registered.
Comment 3 Shaohua 2004-11-14 21:28:49 UTC
I should have mentioned there is no extra interrupt registered in current 
Linux. If yes, mattheiu Willox's patch will fix it.
I'm sorry, this is a potential bug.
Comment 4 Luming Yu 2004-12-06 06:13:21 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2934 ***
Comment 5 Luming Yu 2004-12-06 06:15:31 UTC
Yes, this is addressed by 2934, So close it as  rejected duplicate. 

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.