From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3C1902F0.9040807@embeddededge.com> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:35:12 -0500 From: Dan Malek MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Rossi Cc: Embedded Linux PPC List Subject: Re: high priority interrupts disabled - problem found References: <3C112297.6DE37608@labs.mot.com> <3C114C63.3050102@embeddededge.com> <3C14F91F.F382ABE3@labs.mot.com> <3C177748.1A1342C2@labs.mot.com> <3C17E3B4.9E73B22E@labs.mot.com> <3C18336D.7030706@embeddededge.com> <3C18C309.9D234D7F@labs.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Steve Rossi wrote: > Thanks for your followup Dan. I've got a rather straightforward "dumb" approach > to fixing this problem - see the patch below. Looks pretty good. My last concern is the way we overload the semantics of the functions depending upon a driver requesting the service and the interrupt controller using these functions. For example, a driver will request to enable or disable one particular interrupt, while the interrupt handling functions will need to honor the priority, as you have added. Allowing a driver request to affect the priority mask may not be appropriate. Thanks for the effort understanding the problem and finding a solution that works for you. It appears to be "more right" than it was :-). -- Dan ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/