Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 08 Mar 2004 19:42:53 +0900 | From | Kenji Kaneshige <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] fix PCI interrupt setting for ia64 |
| |
Hi,
As a matter of fact, I don't have special reason to leave RTEs unmasked in iosapic_register_intr(), iosapic_register_platform_intr(), iosapic_override_isa_irq(). I think it is better that interrupts are unmasked by individual device drivers, but there are some exceptions. For example, PMI and INIT don't need device drivers. So I think more investigation is needed about them.
Regards, Kenji Kaneshige
> -----Original Message----- > From: Liu, Benjamin [mailto:benjamin.liu@intel.com] > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 6:15 PM > To: Kenji Kaneshige; linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH] fix PCI interrupt setting for ia64 > > > Thank you for the information, Kenji. But is there any reason to > leave it unmasked in iosapic_register_intr(), > iosapic_register_platform_intr(), iosapic_override_isa_irq(), > given the fact that they would be unmasked finally in individual > device drivers?
- 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/
| |