Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:46:43 -0400 (EDT) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |