On Thu, 2006-05-25 at 18:00 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > So it's bcm's fault ? Did you do a bit of analysis ? that would be > useful... I kinda assumed the list was lagging again and my brother had already posted the solution. Yes, bcm does some measuring stuff that keeps interrupts disabled for lots of milliseconds (25 or something). It's being fixed. I still think, however, that we ought to be able to deal with lost interrupts. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part