From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <47D13AFD.20105@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 13:54:21 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <47CE8544.9070800@domain.hid> <47CE9A92.10206@domain.hid> <47CEA5FD.4080202@domain.hid> <47CFD700.5070001@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <47CFD700.5070001@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Shared IRQ issue with Xeno Peak PCI CAN driver List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Wolfgang Grandegger Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Klaas Gadeyne wrote: >>> --- rtcan_sja1000.c (revision 3533) >>> +++ rtcan_sja1000.c (working copy) >>> @@ -765,7 +765,7 @@ >>> if (ret) { >>> printk(KERN_ERR "ERROR %d: IRQ %d is %s!\n", >>> ret, chip->irq_num, ret == -EBUSY ? >>> - "busy, check shared interrupt support" : "invalid"); >>> + "busy. If you have a card with > 1 channel, check if CONFIG_XENO_OPT_SHIRQ* is set" : "invalid"); >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> Not kernel coding style, I know :-) >> #ifndef CONFIG_XENO_OPT_SHIRQ >> printk("Enable CONFIG_XENO_OPT_SHIRQ") >> ? > > No. In the past the config name changed with 2.4 and that was the main > reason to remove it from the driver. I'm going to update the description > and error messages as suggested by Klaas, but avoiding the config name. Ok, that makes sense. I was thinking, if there is alreay CONFIG_XENO_OPT_SHIRQ in the text, we could also make it depend on that switch. If there is no explicit mentioning, even better. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux