From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 20 May 2002 20:06:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 20 May 2002 20:06:26 -0400 Received: from 64-166-72-142.ayrnetworks.com ([64.166.72.142]:59013 "EHLO ayrnetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 20 May 2002 20:06:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:05:23 -0700 From: William Jhun To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] arch/i386/kernel/irq.c: do_IRQ() Message-ID: <20020520170523.I20837@ayrnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Though a comment in arch/i386/kernel/irq.c: do_IRQ() clearly states: * 0 return value means that this irq is already being * handled by some other CPU. (or is disabled) it seems that the function can only ever return (1). We wrote some low-level interrupt handling code that depends on the correct value of this function. Is the following patch what was initially desired? (patched against 2.4.18 tarball from kernel.org...) Thanks, William Jhun --- *** irq.c.orig Mon May 20 16:55:42 2002 --- irq.c Mon May 20 16:57:00 2002 *************** *** 639,645 **** if (softirq_pending(cpu)) do_softirq(); ! return 1; } /** --- 639,645 ---- if (softirq_pending(cpu)) do_softirq(); ! return (action != NULL); } /**