Possible bug in CPM interrupt handling

[Dan Malek]

Ian Abbott wrote:
>
> In function cpm_interrupt (commproc.c), the last line is:
>
>         ((immap_t *)IMAP_ADDR)->im_cpic.cpic_cisr |= (1 << vec);

Oh crap, it that _still_ there?  Yes, you are correct, and I don't
know why I can't make this modification stick.  I'm going to push
it into the 2.4 BK tree right now.......

> If there are nested interrupts (are these allowed?) this makes sure
> only the specific interrupt we are dealing with is acknowledged.

Yes, they are allowed and this is a bug.  Thanks.


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/