On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 10:10:15 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:31:11 +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 4:16 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Implementing 1* has the drawback of limiting interrupt support to ICH5 > > > and later chips, but I suspect it is the easiest and safest way, so I > > > have no objection if you want to do that. > > > > Let's do this first, and then refactor later to add support for > > pre-ICH5 parts, if needed. > > OK, fine with me. The only downside is that it excludes my > heavily-shared IRQ test machine, so testing that the shared IRQ case is > properly covered will be a little harder. Actually, no problem there: I can reproduce the issue just fine on my ICH5 system, which shares an IRQ between the sound chip and the SMBus controller. So I can use that system to test the updated code too. -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
