Andrea Arcangeli (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sun, 30 Aug 1998 15:24:06 +0200 (CEST)
On Sun, 30 Aug 1998, Philip Blundell wrote:
>>I think it' s better to implement it now instead of wait the middle of
>I'm not sure Linus would accept it. He seems to be in deep code-freeze mode
>at the moment. The code we have at the moment does work so it should probably
>be left alone.
It' s a code cleanup not a new feature. Anyway I think I' ll implement it
>Apparently it's because of the details of the Amiga hardware. It does seem
>slightly strange but I assume the m68k people know what they're doing.
So they have to hack every other Linux driver that use an interrupt
handler out there? I should have not understand something for sure or the
m68k port is very broken...
What they have to do in the irq handler? Can somebody show me the
additional code that lp would need (with some comment or course ;-).
i386 ack the irq using mask_and_ack_8259A() before start the irq handler.
>>And I don' t understand how changing the parport irq handling code would
>>help workarounding this port bug (even if I agree for other reasons to
>>change the code).
>If the lowlevel driver handles the interrupts, it can perform whatever strange
>acknowledge behaviour is needed either before or after the highlevel driver
My thought was not allowing the lowlevel parport code to own the irq
hanlder but instead allowing the _common_ parport_share code to own the
irq so it would not help m68k guys at all.
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: email@example.com --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed 30 Dec 1998 - 10:18:09 EST