On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:01:51PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > > Hmm, why isn't chip->unmask() sufficient ? > > That's a good question. I'll take a look at what ia64 is doing > in the ->unmask() and ->end() functions to see if I can fix this > with some code shuffling. > Did you end up solving this? ia64 iosapic and parisc iosapic still look fairly similar... I hit the same issue of ->end() not being called in the handle_level_irq path and ended up just folding in the missing bit to ->unmask (we were already EOI the IOSAPIC, but missing the EOI for the parisc cpu.) --Kyle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
