[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <g2xcabda6421004170925l8c824191t5d451434d24320ae@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 18:25:31 +0200
From: christian pellegrin <chripell@...e.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: feng.tang@...el.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, greg@...ah.com,
david-b@...bell.net, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] max3100: added raise_threaded_irq
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> I wonder whether we should restrict this mechanism to threaded
> handlers or just implement it in the following way:
>
.....
> This will not work out of the box when the irq is nested into some
> demultiplexing thread handler (IRQF_NESTED_THREAD).
>
OK, I see. The solution you proposed has many other uses such testing
of interrupt handlers in general. I will try to do some work along the
line you suggested next week.
Thank you!
--
Christian Pellegrin, see http://www.evolware.org/chri/
"Real Programmers don't play tennis, or any other sport which requires
you to change clothes. Mountain climbing is OK, and Real Programmers
wear their climbing boots to work in case a mountain should suddenly
spring up in the middle of the computer room."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists