lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectWrong use of IRQ-handling in ftape?
Date
Hello,

I noticed the change in request_irq and free_irq together with the
introduction of shared interrupts.

As writing a section of the Kernel Korner in Linux Journal, I wondered
what the new "device id" meant.

As Shared Interrupts are a concept supported by PCI, which introduces
device ids as well, I saw those to concepts together and believed
that the device id should is only useful when SA_SHIRQ is set (when
calling request_irq). Howether, when looking at patch-1.3.74.gz, I
noticed that the calls to "request_irq" and "free_irq" don't support
shared irqs, but anyway set the device id. This should not be
harmful, but who understood the new irq-concept wrong, me or the
"patcher"?

If I should be wrong, I'd be glad to get to know more about the new
dev_id-entry, otherwise I suggest free_irq and request_irq should
be changed again in ftape.c


Bye,


Georg Zezschwitz


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.022 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site