Hi Timur. On 31 October 2015 at 04:37, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/30/2015 02:05 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: >> >> I was only asking why the interrupt was optional, and it seems per the >> spec it's expected to be handed to an agent at a higher exception level. >> >> That implies that the OS should only care about WS0, assuming that I've >> understood correctly. > > > Yes, this my understand as well. Apologies if I didn't get that across. Sorry for misunderstanding your meaning. maybe Linux don't need to handle WS1, but I am not sure if there is a hardware with WS1 interrupt we need to handle. > > > -- > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the > Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. -- Best regards, Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct) Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile) Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15, One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District, Shanghai,China 200021 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
