* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Note that I'm not opposed to the change at all, I think it's a good > idea, I'm just worried I'm discovering it a bit late and I've seen > PICs broken in some many colorful ways that I'm a bit worried... Oh > well...
This change does not really change irq-flow semantics, what it does is that disable_irq()'s effect is delayed. The irq controller does not have to re-assert the irq, we've got the soft-resend mechanism. What am i missing? Are you worried about this change causing actual breakage? (and i'm sorry about not having Cc:-ed you explicitly, i could have sworn you were included in that discussion but apparently not!) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/