On Mon, 15 May 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Llu, 2006-05-08 at 17:34 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > > So 8250 is requesting an IRQ for non-sharing mode and it's actually
> > > failing, because something else is already using that IRQ. The difference
> > > is that the kernel now generates a warning when this happens.
> >
> > Maybe someone is clearing the UPF_SHARE_IRQ flag? Which port is this?
>
> Its a bug in the PCMCIA code. Its the one I hit with the IDE code.
> Asking for a private IRQ is not always honoured.
Note that some PCMCIA architectures simply _will_not_ give you a private
IRQ. Ever. They may not have any ISA interrupts to give, even to old
16-bit cards. So the choice may be "shared irq or nothing".
So I would strongly argue that any driver that depends on getting an
exclusive IRQ is buggy, not the PCMCIA layer itself, and that it would be
a lot more productive to try to fix those drivers.
Especially since exclusive irq's are clearly a dying breed, and have been
for the last decade or two. Why try to keep that braindamage alive?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
