Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:27:18 +0100 | From | Uwe Kleine-König <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED at the right place |
| |
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:21:30PM -0800, David Brownell wrote: > On Monday 30 November 2009, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > + if (new->flags & IRQF_DISABLED) > > + pr_warning("IRQ %d/%s: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed " > > + "on shared IRQs\n", irq, new->name); > > This should have copied the original test ... this way, > it's dropping the SHARED constraint, and trying to morph > into a generic "IRQF_DISABLED is eeebil!" test. No, it doesn't. The inserted code is in an if block:
old_ptr = &desc->action; old = *old_ptr; if (old) { /* ... */ if (!((old->flags & new->flags) & IRQF_SHARED) || ((old->flags ^ new->flags) & IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK)) { old_name = old->name; goto mismatch; }
...
+ if (new->flags & IRQF_DISABLED) + pr_warning("...");
and the mismatch label is further below. So the warning is still only hit if a shared irq is registered.
Best regards Uwe
-- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- 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/
| |