Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Aug 1998 19:01:27 +0300 | From | Meelis Roos <> | Subject | Re: Shared edge triggered interrupts |
| |
PTB> Seems a flawed argument to me.
PTB> I don't know how _PC_ interrupts handle themselves, but in an industry PTB> generic context I would have expected that we now have to return and tell PTB> X that we handled its interrupt and would it now please stop shouting PTB> and lower its line (it may have already done so - I don't know if it PTB> expects an ack).
PTB> We then should look again to see if the interrupt is still asserted, and PTB> if it is, poll to find out why. I assume the interrupt was latched PTB> but level triggered, so that resetting the latch while Y is still PTB> asserting a high will leave the latch set and we'll see it.
To me it seems that you are describing level-triggered interrupts. These are reliably shareable AFAIK. The problem is with sharing edge-triggered interrupts.
-- Meelis Roos (mroos@tartu.cyber.ee)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |