On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 00:00 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > couldnt most of these problems be avoided by tracking whether a handler
> > > _ever_ returned a success status? That means that irqpoll could safely
> > > poll handlers for which we know that they somehow arent yet matched up
> > > to any IRQ line?
> >
> > I suspect the real solution is to have a
> >
> > disable_irq_handler(irq, handler)
> >
> > function which does 2 things
> > 1) disable the irq at the hardware level
> > 2) mark the handler as "don't call me"
> >
> > it matches the semantics here; what these drivers want is 1) not get
> > an irq handler called and 2) not get an irq flood
>
> ok, this would work. But there is a practical problem: only in drivers/*
> there's 310 disable_irq() calls - each would have to be changed to
> disable_irq_handler() [and i dont see any good way to automate that
> conversion] ...
want to take a bet on the number of those 310 that are just totally
bogus ?
-
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]
