On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:03:44 +0200 (CEST), Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am Donnerstag 21 Oktober 2010, 21:45:35 schrieb Thomas Gleixner: >> > Why shold it solve it ? irq_enable is set to compat_irq_enable which >> > in turn calls chip->enable. >> > >> > So how's that different ? >> >> I took a closer look on the issue. >> >> check_irq_resend() gets called before irq_chip_set_defaults(). >> In the first call to check_irq_resend() desc->irq_data.chip->irq_enable is >> NULL. UML dies due to a NULL-pointer dereference... >> >> I don't know why check_irq_resend() is called before irq_chip_set_defaults(). >> It's your code. ;-) > > Well, but it only gets called via enable_irq(). So that means > something is calling enable_irq _before_ request/setup_irq(). > > arch/um/kernel/irq.c:init_IRQ() does that :) Sorry I'm not very familiar with the IRQ stuff. Does that mean init_IRQ() is not allowed to call enable_irq()? Thanks, //richard > Thanks, > > tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
