Interrupt vector sharing

Chris Johns cjohns at
Fri Mar 14 03:43:21 UTC 2003

gregory.menke at wrote:

> I've been thinking a bit about how to handle the shared interrupt
> issue.  It seems to me the existing powerpc/shared irq handling code
> could be augmented to include a new function;
> int BSP_install_rtems_shared_irq_handler
>                  (const rtems_irq_connect_data* irq)

What about "BSP_install_rtems_add_handler" ?

This is what Solaris's DDI uses. See:

If shared ints are not supported, only allow one addition and return an error if more 
are made.

Why is BSP_* used ?

Would CPU_* have been a better prefix to use ?

> Unless there are strong objections, I think I'll give the
> modifications a try.

I am not objecting, just tring to keep the growth of new functions for specific cases 
when maybe one could be used.

  Chris Johns, cjohns at

More information about the users mailing list