Thanks, applied.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Artyom Tarasenko
wrote:
> Don't raise irq when not enabled.
> Raise irq on enabling if DMA_INTR is set
> Don't clear irq unless it was raised by DMA, as there are other irq sources
> Don't set DMA_INTR bit spuriously.
>
> v1->v2:
> - Don't clear
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:32 AM, Artyom Tarasenko
wrote:
> 2010/2/12 Blue Swirl :
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Artyom Tarasenko
>> wrote:
>>> Don't raise interrupt when not enabled.
>>> Don't set DMA_INTR bit spuriously.
>>> Don't print misleading debug messages "Raise IRQ" when not rais
2010/2/12 Blue Swirl :
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Artyom Tarasenko
> wrote:
>> Don't raise interrupt when not enabled.
>> Don't set DMA_INTR bit spuriously.
>> Don't print misleading debug messages "Raise IRQ" when not raising any.
>
> This breaks most of my Linux tests. *BSD are unaffect
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Artyom Tarasenko
wrote:
> Don't raise interrupt when not enabled.
> Don't set DMA_INTR bit spuriously.
> Don't print misleading debug messages "Raise IRQ" when not raising any.
This breaks most of my Linux tests. *BSD are unaffected. For example
sparc-test 2.0:
2010/2/10 Artyom Tarasenko :
> Don't raise interrupt when not enabled.
> Don't set DMA_INTR bit spuriously.
> Don't print misleading debug messages "Raise IRQ" when not raising any.
Haven't noticed that these were introduced recently.
Shall we revert 787cfbc432bf1d353a77cbdb613754f3963371a3 and r
