From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262149AbTJIMz4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:55:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262129AbTJIMzz (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:55:55 -0400 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:37382 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262111AbTJIMzy (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:55:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:55:36 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Linus Torvalds cc: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, , Marcelo Tosatti , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [RFC] disable_irq()/enable_irq() semantics and ide-probe.c In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And while I agree that the depth clearing is bogus, but I'd be worried > about removing it in case some driver actually depends on it (ie > historically it has actually been ok to do: > > disable_irq(irq); > .. set up device .. > request_irq(irq, ..); // This will also enable the irq > > even though it's ugly, and I hope nobody does it). If there are such cases left, I'd really prefer we fix them, as currently nothing protects this against another driver requesting the same irq. To make this even more fun the behaviour is also different if the irq is shared, as the irq is not enabled in this case. In the ide driver I'd really like to see that at the time the probe function reenables the interrupt there is either an irq handler installed or it failed. On the Amiga we also have always problems with this, as the interrupt must be acknowledged by the driver, so we have to be careful not to leave anything pending. The irq handler would automatically take care of this and would make this simpler. bye, Roman