Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:30:17 +0200 | From | Torben Mathiasen <> | Subject | Re: SA_INTERRUPT |
| |
On Sun, Oct 01 2000, Torben Mathiasen wrote: > On Sat, Sep 30 2000, Sandy Harris wrote: > > Don Becker has some text at: > > > > http://www.scyld.com/expert/irq-conflict.html > > > > which includes a section: > > > > > Why SA_INTERRUPT in the SCSI drivers is a Bad Thing > > > > > ... it could potentially have a very negative impact on all other interrupt-driven > > > kernel service. That includes just about everything ... > > > > > > I believe that very few complex devices can be correctly run by a device driver > > > that uses SA_INTERRUPT. > > > > So I grepped drivers/*/*.c in the nearest handy kernel source, which happened to be > > 2.2.16, and found 113 uses of SA_INTEERUPT, 64 in drivers/scsi/*.c and the rest spread > > around. > > > > Do we have a problem? Should it be fixed as part of the cleanup before 2.4.0? > > No. SA_INTERRUPT is a must today. Its much better to just do BIOS tweaks to force > irq assignments. Thats just IMHO. >
Ooops. Just saw Andrea's mail. Don't know what I was smoking. SA_INTERRUPT Not SA_SHIRQ.
Sorry, for the crap.
-- Torben Mathiasen <tmm@image.dk> Linux ThunderLAN maintainer http://tlan.kernel.dk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |