Alan Cox wrote:
> On Iau, 2003-09-04 at 13:52, Felipe W Damasio wrote:
> 
>>	But I'm not sure on how we should go here: We go get the hold lock 
>>right after 'status=inb(ioaddr+HOST_CMD)', so we can treat the 
>>interrupt safely.
>>
>>	Although, there are some places that we do "wake_up (lp->event)", 
> 
> 
> wake_up will not sleep, its safe from interrupts and with locks held.

	So I think we can use something like the attached patch, then..which 
get the lock before the while loop on mc32_interrupt and releases it 
after processing the interrupts.

	Richard, could you please test it?

	Thanks

Felipe