From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <500245.60842.qm@domain.hid> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:48:49 +0000 (GMT) From: A C MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-857040023-1260463729=:60842" Subject: [Adeos-main] Porting Adeos-Ipipe on AVR32 (NGW 100). List-Id: General discussion about Adeos List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: adeos-main@gna.org --0-857040023-1260463729=:60842 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,=0A=0AWe started to port Adeos for the IRQs part. =0A=0ASimple questi= on: Why the function raw_irqs_disabled_flags(flags) is the same with or wit= hout ipipe ? (as we saw in some arch).=0A=0A(in the case with ipipe) =0AWhy= =0Anot use __ipipe_test_root() -in the same way as the function=0A__raw_loc= al_save_flags()- to write the new function=0Araw_irqs_disabled_flags(flags)= ?=0A=0ARegards=0A=0AAdrien Chiron & Vincent Vanbesien=0A=0A=0A --0-857040023-1260463729=:60842 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,

We started to port Adeos for the IRQs part.=

Simple question: Why the function raw_irqs_disabled_flags(flags) i= s the same with or without ipipe ? (as we saw in some arch).

(in th= e case with ipipe)
Why=0Anot use __ipipe_test_root() -in the same way a= s the function=0A__raw_local_save_flags()- to write the new function=0Araw_= irqs_disabled_flags(flags)?

Regards

Adrien Chiron & Vince= nt Vanbesien
=0A=0A

=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A --0-857040023-1260463729=:60842--