On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 9/30/2016 3:39 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> how do we feel about increasing the ISA IRQ range to 256 so that >>> > we are safe for all SCI interrupts? >> I'm not sure how this is related to the problem at hand. Care to elaborate? >> > > Sure, let me explain. > [cut] > > I hope it makes sense now. I tend to skip details sometimes. Feel free to > send more questions. Thanks for the information! IIUC, basically, what you are proposing would be to restore the old penalizing method for IRQs in the 0-255 range and use the new approach for the rest, right? What's the drawback, if any? Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
