Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:33:46 +0300 | From | "Kirill A. Shutemov" <> | Subject | Re: [004/244] sfi: table irq 0xFF means no interrupt |
| |
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 07:18:27AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 01:21:00PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 02:59:28PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > 3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> > > > > > > commit a94cc4e6c0a26a7c8f79a432ab2c89534aa674d5 upstream. > > > > > > According to the SFI specification irq number 0xFF means device has no > > > interrupt or interrupt attached via GPIO. > > > > > > Currently, we don't handle this special case and set irq field in > > > *_board_info structs to 255. It leads to confusion in some drivers. > > > Accelerometer driver tries to register interrupt 255, fails and prints > > > "Cannot get IRQ" to dmesg. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> > > > > Please, take this as well: > > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/14/40 > > Is that patch in Linus's tree?
No, it isn't.
Do not apply "sfi: table irq 0xFF means no interrupt" in this case. It breaks kexec. Better to take both patches into next stable release.
-- Kirill A. Shutemov
| |