> OK. But that still didn't give me a how-to-get-this-to-mainline graph.
I can't answer this, other than the obvious: it'd be good to get
acks from Adam and/or Shaohua and Russell.
> Bjorn, are these patches considered for-2.6.18 material? (They look like
> it).
Yes, please. I should have bee
"Brown, Len" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >pnpacpi confuses me. Who maintains it? Is it considered an
> >APCI thing, or a PNP thing or a Bjorn thing?
>
> PNP is Adam's generic Linux PNP layer.
> It has "drivers" underneath is, such as pnp-isa, and pnp-bios
>
> Shaohua invented pnp-acpi as a
>pnpacpi confuses me. Who maintains it? Is it considered an
>APCI thing, or a PNP thing or a Bjorn thing?
PNP is Adam's generic Linux PNP layer.
It has "drivers" underneath is, such as pnp-isa, and pnp-bios
Shaohua invented pnp-acpi as a driver to replace pnp-bios
on ACPI-enabled systems.
So
Bjorn Helgaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- work-mm7.orig/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/rsparser.c 2006-06-30
> 11:52:18.0 -0600
> +++ work-mm7/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/rsparser.c 2006-06-30 12:18:41.0
> -0600
pnpacpi confuses me. Who maintains it? Is it considered an APCI thing,
ACPI supplies a "shareable" indication, but PNPACPI ignores it.
If a PNP device uses a shared interrupt, request_irq() fails
because the PNP driver can't tell whether to supply SA_SHIRQ.
This patch allows PNP drivers to test
(pnp_irq_flags(dev, 0) & IORESOURCE_IRQ_SHAREABLE)
Signed-off-by: Bj
