I did boot with irqpoll, and indeed the unhandled interrupt does not occur,
but my understanding is that the irqpoll option is a temporary measure
(maybe to get past anotherwise fatal unhandled interrupt), but not a
permanent fix.  (Because it is inefficient for the kernel to perform such
polling?  I'm not sure.)

I have not tried the upgrade kernel from backport.  I'll give that a shot.
Thanks!


On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 8:46 AM, claude juif <claude.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

> By the way, have you tried to boot with irqpoll as the kernel says ?
>
> And i suppose you use wheezy according to your kernel (3.2.65) version, so
> did you try to upgrade kernel from backport (3.16.7) ?
>
> 2015-04-23 14:26 GMT+02:00 Kynn Jones <kyn...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Thanks for your comment.
>>
>> It turns out that unhandled IRQ16 happens irrespective of which USB port
>> the mouse is connected to, or even if the mouse is connected at all at the
>> time the system goes to sleep (in the latter case, when the mouse is
>> re-connected, it still shows the same lag).  (I posted about this in the
>> bug report I sent: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97131)
>>
>> I think the mouse here is an "innocent bystander caught in the crossfire"
>> :)
>>
>> kj
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:25 AM, claude juif <claude.j...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Did the mouse lags occurs on all usb port ? Because you lspci return
>>> usb1 on IRQ16 and usb2 on IRQ23.
>>>
>>> So if your problem is related to IRQ16, changing USB port might resolv
>>> the problem. If the problem still there, i guess IRQ16 have nothing to do
>>> with your mouse lags.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> 2015-04-22 17:33 GMT+02:00 Kynn Jones <kyn...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Kynn Jones <kyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > OK, I found a way to turn off one of the two snd_hda_intel,
>>>> > but it turned out to be the one on IRQ 45.  (In any case,
>>>> > doing this did not solve the problem.)  The method I used was
>>>>
>>>> > 1. find the prefix of the audio device(s) in the output of lspci
>>>> > 2. search for a path under /sys/devices with this prefix in the
>>>> basename
>>>> > 3. add a line of the form
>>>>
>>>> >     echo 1 > /path/found/in/previous/step/remove
>>>>
>>>> > When did step (1) I found two candidate prefixes 00:03.0 and 00.1b.0,
>>>> from the lines
>>>>
>>>> >     00:03.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation Haswell HD Audio
>>>> Controller (rev 06)
>>>> >     00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation Lynx Point High
>>>> Definition Audio Controller (rev 04)
>>>>
>>>> > but in step (2) I was able to find only one matching path, namely
>>>>
>>>> >     /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1b.0
>>>>
>>>> Correction: when I looked again I did find a file for 00.03.0:
>>>>
>>>>    /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:03.0
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure why I missed it the first time.
>>>>
>>>> > I went ahead and added the line
>>>>
>>>> >     echo 1 > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1b.0/remove
>>>>
>>>> > to /etc/rc.local, and rebooted.
>>>>
>>>> I repeated the same thing once more with this line instead:
>>>>
>>>>     echo 1 > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:03.0/remove
>>>>
>>>> ...and now after rebooting the IRQ 16 line of /proc/interrupts
>>>> shows only one driver:
>>>>
>>>>     # grep '^ 16:' /proc/interrupts
>>>>      16:       1211          0          0          0
>>>> IR-IO-APIC-fasteoi   ehci_hcd:usb1
>>>>
>>>> But, unfortunately, this turned out to be a red herring: the
>>>> unhandled IRQ 16 error continues to happen, and along with it the
>>>> mouse that, as it were, "wakes drunk from sleep".  (At least the
>>>> system's sound continues to work fine, AFAICT.)
>>>>
>>>> Now it looks like the problem is with the ehci_hcd driver.
>>>>
>>>> In this case, I don't think that disabling the driver is an
>>>> option, so I decided to send a full bug report to the
>>>> debian-kernel list, here:
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2015/04/msg00348.html
>>>>
>>>> Putting aside the main issue (the problem with the mouse) I now
>>>> have the additional (but far less pressing) question of which of
>>>> the two instances of snd_hda_intel I should keep around?
>>>>
>>>> kj
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to