lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] disable_irq()/enable_irq() semantics and ide-probe.c
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Russell King wrote:

> Correct for x86. For other architectures, it many not be so. On ARM for
> example, it is quite normal for IRQ0 to be used. Hopefully it'll be
> something which generic code won't see, but that isn't always true.
> Someone else might actually follow the PCI specs and use "255" to mean
> "no irq" on their PCI bus.

Unfortunately we wouldn't be able to use that for a test on i386;

IRQ251 -> 10:11
IRQ253 -> 10:13
IRQ255 -> 10:15
IRQ256 -> 10:16
IRQ257 -> 10:17
IRQ258 -> 10:18
IRQ259 -> 10:19
-
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 13:49    [W:0.064 / U:1.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site