Jan Kiszka wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: >> PS: We really do want to call mask/unmask instead of disable/enable in any >> case, because ->disable() >> became a nop in 2.6.21, so we just can't rely on its default action anyway. >> This is a separate >> issue, that caused rthal_irq_disable() not to actually mask the interrupt >> when the I/O APIC is enabled. > > Hmmmm... That makes me scratch my head. Could this change have some > impact on I-pipe as well? We are currently pulling hairs here as some > SCSI adapter is flooding us with spurious IRQs during init, but only if > I-pipe is enabled. >
__ipipe_enable_irq/__ipipe_disable_irq are not doing the right thing anymore, but, AFAICT, this would only affect callers of ipipe_virtualize_irq and ipipe_control_irq, using IPIPE_ENABLE_MASK. Btw, are those APIC-based SMP spurious interrupts, or 8259-based ones? -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-help mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
