* 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/
