From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pata_cmd640: implement sff_irq_check() method Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2010 16:10:42 +0400 Message-ID: <4CB05BC2.7080404@ru.mvista.com> References: <201010081856.39644.sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> <20101008173445.610b9202@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:61669 "EHLO mail-ew0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755378Ab0JIMM3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Oct 2010 08:12:29 -0400 Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so30563ewy.19 for ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 05:12:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20101008173445.610b9202@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Hello. On 08-10-2010 20:34, Alan Cox wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov >> --- >> The patch is against the recent Linus' tree. > Why is this needed See http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=27943620cbd960f710a385ff4a538e14ed3f1922 for why this method was introduced. > and what setups did you test ? None. And given the usage of the method (it's called only for unexpected interrupts now), it would be quite hard to test. MBR, Sergei