Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:3598 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752227AbXJZOmB (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:42:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:41:37 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Jes Sorensen Cc: Dan Williams , yi.zhu@intel.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Tomas Winkler Subject: Re: iwl4965 detection problem Message-ID: <20071026144137.GD23415@tuxdriver.com> (sfid-20071026_154212_791431_0C7DF39B) References: <47209C0C.5010505@sgi.com> <1193319925.5542.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4720A509.2070708@sgi.com> <1193333545.2111.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <47219FE6.70900@sgi.com> <20071026123044.GB23415@tuxdriver.com> <4721E17E.2020908@sgi.com> <4721F55F.1030303@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4721F55F.1030303@sgi.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 04:10:39PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: > Disable interrupts in the iwl4965 before calling request_irq() for > the case that the previous OS or the BIOS left a pending interrupt in > the chip. This behavior has been observed on some laptops such as T61 > Thinkpads and Toshiba Portege R500 Any reason this would not be appropriate for iwl3945 as well? John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com