From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46FFE67B5B for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:19:48 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: PowerPC: fix breakage in threaded fasteoi type IRQ handlers From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Ingo Molnar In-Reply-To: <20061119200650.GA22949@elte.hu> References: <200611192243.34850.sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> <1163966437.5826.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061119200650.GA22949@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:19:50 +1100 Message-Id: <1163967590.5826.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwalker@mvista.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 21:06 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > Wait wait wait .... Can somebody (Ingo ?) explain me why the fasteoi > > handler is being changed and what is the rationale for adding an ack > > that was not necessary before ? > > dont worry, it's -rt only stuff. Still, I'm curious :-) Besides, there have been people talking about having -rt work on ppc64 so ... What do you need an ack() for on fasteoi ? On all fasteoi controllers I have, ack is implicit by obtaining the vector number and all there is is an eoi... Cheers, Ben.