Geert,
> I didn't realize it before, but the EtherNAT CPLD acts as an interrupt > controller? That's correct. > So you are probably better off creating a separate IRQ chip for it (IRQ 139 > is USB, IRQ 140 is Ethernet). Then all this can be hidden in the EtherNAT > CPLD irq_chip methods. Meaning request_irq will enable it and so on? That would be the ideal solution indeed. The irq to vector mapping remains the same here? > BTW, are there any other IRQs generated by this CPLD? Nope, that's all. Cheers, Michael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
