Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:21:54 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: VM86 interrupt emulation breakage and FIXes for 2.6.x kernel series |
| |
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Sad, 2004-12-11 at 01:23, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > Until the 10,000th event it actually seems to work rather happily > > > without that change. > > > > I suspect you never tried the level-triggered case. > > Level triggered has never been supported.
So? You want it to lock up the machine?
Alan, what _are_ you arguing about? That "disable_irq()" is absolutely rquired, because: - not having it locks up the machine if the irq happens to be level. - not having it means that the "enable_irq()" that happens when the irq is reported to user space is unbalanced.
> Putting a single disable_irq in doesn't change the fact it doesn't work > because the IRQ is never re-enabled.
Did you actually test the code? Did you ever _look_ at it?
Linus - 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/
| |