On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:40:19 -0700 Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote: > The previous patch put all the code, and handlers in place. It should > now be safe to enable the parity error interrupt. The parity error must > be unmasked in both the GTIMR, and the CS IMR. Unfortunately, the docs > aren't clear about this; nevertheless it's the truth. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> > --- Can't say I like all the IS_IVB branches, but they're probably ok until we add the next IVB specific feature, then we can fork the functions into IVB specific ones. Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org> -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
