Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: irq probe can be done without risking an IRQ storm

2007-04-26 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 19:31 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > #ifdef CONFIG_PCMCIA_PROBE > > > + if (!(req->Attributes & IRQ_HANDLE_PRESENT)) > > > + type |= IRQ_NOAUTOEN; > > > + > > > if (s->irq.AssignedIRQ != 0) { > > > /* If the interrupt is already assigned, it must be t

Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: irq probe can be done without risking an IRQ storm

2007-04-26 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 21:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 14:09:36 +0100 Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Nowdays you can ask for an IRQ to be allocated but not enabled, when > > PCMCIA was written this was not true and this feature is thus not used > > > > Signed-off-

Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: irq probe can be done without risking an IRQ storm

2007-04-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 14:09:36 +0100 Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nowdays you can ask for an IRQ to be allocated but not enabled, when > PCMCIA was written this was not true and this feature is thus not used > > Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > diff -u --new-file --recursive

[PATCH] pcmcia: irq probe can be done without risking an IRQ storm

2007-04-05 Thread Alan Cox
Nowdays you can ask for an IRQ to be allocated but not enabled, when PCMCIA was written this was not true and this feature is thus not used Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc5-mm4/drivers/pcmcia/pcmci