lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.079 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site