lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix shared interrupt handling of SA_INTERRUPT and SA_SAMPLE_RANDOM
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 02:50:52PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:41:12 -0700,
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyway, suppressing the unnecessary call of add_interrupt_randomness()
> > > should be still valid. The reduced patch is below.
> (snip)
> >
> > Shouldn't that be `if (ret == IRQ_HANDLED)'?
>
> Yes, it's more strict.

I don't think so. Look at what's going on. If "ret" is IRQ_HANDLED
all well and fine. However, look at how "retval" is being used:

static void __report_bad_irq(int irq, irq_desc_t *desc, irqreturn_t action_ret)
{
...
if (action_ret != IRQ_HANDLED && action_ret != IRQ_NONE) {
printk(KERN_ERR "irq event %d: bogus return value %x\n",
irq, action_ret);
} else {
printk(KERN_ERR "irq %d: nobody cared!\n", irq);
}

So, we're looking to see not only if a handler returned IRQ_HANDLED,
but also if a handler returned _some other value_ other than IRQ_HANDLED
or IRQ_NONE.

--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:3.993 / U:0.468 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site