Re: 2.6.20 "IRQ handler type mismatch for IRQ 4"

[Florian Schmidt]

On Monday 12 February 2007, Alan wrote:
> > [   23.783913] Serial: 8250/16550 driver $Revision: 1.90 $ 4 ports, IRQ
> > sharing enabled
> > [   23.787063] pnp: Device 00:0c activated.
> > [   23.787420] 00:0c: ttyS0 at I/O 0x3f8 (irq = 4) is a 16550A
>
> So the PnP layers put a device on IRQ 4, which is sensible
>
> > [   37.516000] eth1: orinoco_cs at 0.0, irq 4, io 0x0100-0x013f
>
> The PCMCIA layer then ignores this and takes IRQ 4 simply because
> although PnP has used it the IRQ isnt currently live
>
> > [   53.580000] IRQ handler type mismatch for IRQ 4
> > [   53.580000] current handler: pcmcia0.0
>
> The serial IRQ setup fails
>
> > [   53.580000]  [<c0141a25>] setup_irq+0x135/0x1e0
> > [   53.580000]  [<c0230930>] serial8250_interrupt+0x0/0xf0
> > [   53.580000]  [<c0141b73>] request_irq+0xa3/0xc0
> > [   53.580000]  [<c023086e>] serial8250_startup+0x47e/0x4b0
> > [   53.580000]  [<c022bf58>] uart_startup+0x48/0x160
> > [   53.580000]  [<c022cb9f>] uart_open+0xbf/0x460
>
> This is all scary and generally not needed spew but handy for debug.
>
> Looks like a PCMCIA layer bug. It should be respecting IRQ assignment
> (not just allocation) by other resource configuration layers.

Ah thanks for taking a look. I was slowly getting the impression from older 
lkml posts, that this isn't really what stopped my wifi from functioning. It 
seems there are other reasons and i just stumbled across this harmless 
message in dmesg.. Thanks for clearing it up :)

Flo

-- 
Palimm Palimm!
http://tapas.affenbande.org
-
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/