Re: Possible bug in 8250.c

[Alan Cox]

> So in first iteration, interrupt is cleared, and in second, function will execute:
> 
>           } else if (end == NULL)
>                         end = l;
> 
> which will terminate the loop, but the return code will be IRQ_RETVAL(0).

If you are getting an extra IRQ when then chip itself is indicating no
IRQ then the IRQ is spurious. That probably means you have a problem
elsewhere - eg the IRQ controller being misconfigured between level/edge
triggered.

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/