Ugh. I don't think that should have been allowed to happen. STRICT and
TRUSTIRQ have almost completely opposite meanings.
>Really I think we could drop the TRUSTIRQ thing from lp... It was a good
>improvement here but the point right now is that if somebody really need
>to boost it's better that he goes in sync with the latest parport code
>that uses the FIFO of the port that does the compatibility mode handshake
>in hardware... Killing the trustirq flag should be a one liner patch or a
>little bit more, sure something of safe also for a stable kernel release.
>Comments?
Not everybody has a FIFO-equipped port. That said, I've never been totally
happy with the trustirq thing and I'm not sure the speedup is worth the
uglyness it causes.
p.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/