Re: [PATCH 01/16] pmac_zilog: fix unexpected irq
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011, Alan Cox wrote:
Given the change should work for all hardware do we really need the ifdefs. Far better I would have thought to just change it so we don't have to maintain what is effectively two versions of the code between now and 2038.
So no ack from me yet - I'd like to understand the ifdef decision first.
Removing ifdefs makes the changes more invasive and the suspend/resume code then has to be addressed, which I've avoided. The suspend/resume code path can't be tested on m68k macs and the common code paths I can't easily test on a powermac. This patch should not be needed because the chip reset shouldn't leave the tx and rx interrupts enabled. Those interrupts are explicitly enabled only after request_irq(), so patching the master interrupt enable behaviour should be redundant. But that's not the case in practice. The chip reset code is already messy. I was inclined towards ifdefs and reluctant to share more code after practical experience suggested possible differences in the SCC/ESCC devices. I guess I was hoping that the powermac maintainers might prefer ifdefs to increased risk of destabilising the driver on powermacs... But a more invasive patch would make for better code. I will see if I can borrow a suitable PCI PowerMac. Finn
Otherwise it looks sensible. Alan
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html