[parisc-linux] Some progress with WAX_EISA (Who knows about int errupts?)

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 12:41:32AM +0100, 5116@telia.com wrote:
> >> Well the i386 version is that disable_irq() waits until all pending
> >> interrupts on the local processor have been serviced while
> >> disable_irq_nosync() returns immediately. The parisc version of
> >> disable_irq() seems to be what disable_irq_nosync() is on the i386. 
> > 
> > Uhm. I still don't see the distinction.
> > "nosync" suggests an interaction with other CPU's?

i386 sets IRQ_INPROGRESS before it calls handle_IRQ_event and then
clears it after the interrupt handler returns.  I'm not sure whether
local interrupts are disabled at this point or not.  It might well be
an SMP issue.

I suspect we want to add IRQ_INPROGRESS to our interrupt handlers.

-- 
Revolutions do not require corporate support.