lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [W:0.047 / U:2.184 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site