Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq

> > A small number of boxes do share IRQ12 and it was switched to shared for
> > them.
> If that is the case interrupt handlers should be able to determine whether
> a certain interrupt comes from their respective devices, and return
> IRQ_HANDLED or IRQ_NONE accordingly. Returning IRQ_HANDLED unconditionally
> when IRQF_SHARED is set seems strange. Is this behavior intended?

Sometimes you simple can't tell and in those cases you have no choice.

Alan
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
    • From: [email protected]

• References:
  • [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
    • From: Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
    • From: "Dmitry Torokhov" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
    • From: [email protected]

• Prev by Date: Re: wrong constraints "=g" at include/asm-i386/string.h, line 186?
• Next by Date: Re: [patch] nfs: fix locking in nfs/inode.c in nfs_free_open_context
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] fix return value of i8042_aux_test_irq
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]