Re: [RFC] disable_irq()/enable_irq() semantics and ide-probe.c

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Russell King wrote:

> Correct for x86.  For other architectures, it many not be so.  On ARM for
> example, it is quite normal for IRQ0 to be used.  Hopefully it'll be
> something which generic code won't see, but that isn't always true.
> Someone else might actually follow the PCI specs and use "255" to mean
> "no irq" on their PCI bus.

Unfortunately we wouldn't be able to use that for a test on i386;

IRQ251 -> 10:11
IRQ253 -> 10:13
IRQ255 -> 10:15
IRQ256 -> 10:16
IRQ257 -> 10:17
IRQ258 -> 10:18
IRQ259 -> 10:19
-
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/