On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 18:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 8 Feb 2011, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 15:37 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Gah. You set it indirect via IRQF_PERCPU with setup/request_irq. > > > > > > Staring too long into that code makes my brain fuzzy. > > > > Yes ... know the feeling over the years trying to keep up with the > > various irq schemes. Got to say, it's a lot easier now: The way parisc > > chips accept interrupts is essentially MSI. Trying to live in the old > > world modelled on the x86 PIC wasn't fun. > > > > So did you want me to roll all the fixes together and apply them, or is > > there something else that needs to happen? > > All yours. You might want to split out the CHECK... bugfix first. Good idea ... you authorise me to do the split and add your signed-off-by? > There will be some minor follow up changes, but they depend on code > which I'm going to push soon. OK ... we'll wait for those. I'll plan this for the next merge window. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
