On Sun, Oct 01 2000, Torben Mathiasen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 30 2000, Sandy Harris wrote:
> > Don Becker has some text at:
> >
> > http://www.scyld.com/expert/irq-conflict.html
> >
> > which includes a section:
> >
> > > Why SA_INTERRUPT in the SCSI drivers is a Bad Thing
> >
> > > ... it could potentially have a very negative impact on all other interrupt-driven
> > > kernel service. That includes just about everything ...
> > >
> > > I believe that very few complex devices can be correctly run by a device driver
> > > that uses SA_INTERRUPT.
> >
> > So I grepped drivers/*/*.c in the nearest handy kernel source, which happened to be
> > 2.2.16, and found 113 uses of SA_INTEERUPT, 64 in drivers/scsi/*.c and the rest spread
> > around.
> >
> > Do we have a problem? Should it be fixed as part of the cleanup before 2.4.0?
>
> No. SA_INTERRUPT is a must today. Its much better to just do BIOS tweaks to force
> irq assignments. Thats just IMHO.
>
Ooops. Just saw Andrea's mail. Don't know what I was smoking. SA_INTERRUPT Not SA_SHIRQ.
Sorry, for the crap.
-- Torben Mathiasen <tmm@image.dk> Linux ThunderLAN maintainer http://tlan.kernel.dk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST