Re: [RTnet-developers] RT IRQ sharing

[Jan K. <jan...@we...>]

Marcelo Coelho wrote:
> Hi!
>=20
>=20
>> Don't understand yet what you mean, but the original locking at the
>> interrupt handler tail is correct and should not be changed by your
> patch.
>=20
> Forget it. I thought I saw the saved_state variable outside that
> function.
>=20
>=20
> I've been seeing the kernel driver and it has some differences, namely,=

> it has support for the BUF_IDX different from 2 (which I included).
> Don't know if that is necessary.
>=20
> But, for now I don't have time for more. I think that this patch should=

> solve the situation, but I still have to test with a system.

Please clean up your patches before you post. Means: no unrelated
changes, no uncommented old code, no unused function argument
(ioaddr...), etc.

>=20
> Next week, maybe I'll have some spare time to port the kernel driver.

As I already mailed you privately: there is no need for a complete
"port", just align the code patterns of those functions you have to
touch anyway (specifically rtl8139_interrupt).

Jan