From: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 19:32:39 +0200 (CEST)
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Yong Zhang <yong.zha...@gmail.com> >> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 16:10:42 +0800 >> >> > This flag is a NOOP and can be removed now. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zha...@gmail.com> >> >> I have the same concerns here as I had for the sparc case. >> >> Some of these drivers might be using IRQF_DISABLED to make sure the >> IRQ cannot be delivered until it is explicitly enabled via an >> enable_irq() call. >> >> How is that being accomodated now? > > Again IRQF_DISABLED never ever had that functionality. My bad. But what if these interrupts want interrupts disabled during their interrupt handler, for other reasons? This has the potential to break tons of stuff, especially on the really old chips which almost no developers have any more but some user might try to use. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
