Re: question on spurious interrupts
David Brownell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.usb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thursday 20 September 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> regarding this comment from ehci_irq:
>
> #ifdef EHCI_VERBOSE_DEBUG
> /* unrequested/ignored: Frame List Rollover */
> dbg_status (ehci, "irq", status);
> #endif
>
> How are we supposed to get there if this code comes first:
>
> status &= INTR_MASK;
> if (!status) { /* irq sharing? */
> spin_unlock(&ehci->lock);
> return IRQ_NONE;
> }
>
> Which chipset occur unrequested interrupts with?
None that I recall.
> Shouldn't they be acknowledged and IRQ_HANDLED be returned?
Status flags can be set which don't correspond to IRQs,
and thus which don't need any actions. Like FLR, which
happens regularly whether it causes an IRQ or not.
That's a fairly normal way for IRQs to behave.
- dave
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel