On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, David Miller wrote: > From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:58:45 -0400 (EDT) > > > I'm not sure all of the pci_intx() calls in msi.c should be skipped when > > the quirk applies; I think some of them might be there so that the legacy > > interrupt won't be delivered while MSI is turned off (since the handler > > isn't listening for the legacy interrupts). I'd guess this would cause > > people to have their MSI-capable device kill their non-MSI-capable device > > when they restore their laptop (and the shared interrupt fires and gets > > stuck at just the wrong time). No idea if this is a real concern, but I'm > > pretty sure that not all of those calls are recent. > > I don't think it's a real concern. Okay, good. As long as someone more clueful than me has thought about it, because I couldn't tell off hand. > > There's a couple of ATA drivers that look like they might be trying to > > work around the same bug, but it's a bit hard to tell. It might be good to > > have them use the quirk (or set the flag) because it's cleaner. > > I noticed these cases as well, and I would hope that Jeff would help > out here using the infrastructure my patches created. Or coordinate with someone with the quirky hardware, yes. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
