Re: [PATCH 0/4]: Resolve MSI vs. INTX_DISABLE quirks.

[Daniel Barkalow]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, David Miller wrote:

> From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:58:45 -0400 (EDT)
> 
> > I'm not sure all of the pci_intx() calls in msi.c should be skipped when 
> > the quirk applies; I think some of them might be there so that the legacy 
> > interrupt won't be delivered while MSI is turned off (since the handler 
> > isn't listening for the legacy interrupts). I'd guess this would cause 
> > people to have their MSI-capable device kill their non-MSI-capable device 
> > when they restore their laptop (and the shared interrupt fires and gets 
> > stuck at just the wrong time). No idea if this is a real concern, but I'm 
> > pretty sure that not all of those calls are recent.
> 
> I don't think it's a real concern.

Okay, good. As long as someone more clueful than me has thought about it, 
because I couldn't tell off hand.

> > There's a couple of ATA drivers that look like they might be trying to 
> > work around the same bug, but it's a bit hard to tell. It might be good to 
> > have them use the quirk (or set the flag) because it's cleaner.
> 
> I noticed these cases as well, and I would hope that Jeff would help
> out here using the infrastructure my patches created.

Or coordinate with someone with the quirky hardware, yes.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
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/