From e78181feb0b94fb6afeaef3b28d4f5df1b847c98 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Johannes Berg Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 23:17:20 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] b44: change comment about irq mask register Through some experimentation with the similarly built bcm43xx I came to the conclusion that if the hw/firmware sets a bit in the interrupt register, an interrupt will only be raised if that bit is included in the interrupt mask. Hence, the interrupt mask is more like an interrupt control mask. This patch changes the comment to reflect that. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik --- drivers/net/b44.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/net/b44.c') diff --git a/drivers/net/b44.c b/drivers/net/b44.c index 1ec217433b4c..474a4e3438db 100644 --- a/drivers/net/b44.c +++ b/drivers/net/b44.c @@ -908,8 +908,9 @@ static irqreturn_t b44_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) istat = br32(bp, B44_ISTAT); imask = br32(bp, B44_IMASK); - /* ??? What the fuck is the purpose of the interrupt mask - * ??? register if we have to mask it out by hand anyways? + /* The interrupt mask register controls which interrupt bits + * will actually raise an interrupt to the CPU when set by hw/firmware, + * but doesn't mask off the bits. */ istat &= imask; if (istat) { -- cgit v1.2.3