hi all
could someone conjur up the simplest case when PKINTERRUPT param to isr is usefull?
i thought:
when a device has 2 interrupt vectors
for example a device that
interrupts upon read complete on one vector
and interrupts upon write complete on a different vector
if the device connects both vectors to one ISR
then it would need the pointer to the interrupt object in order to decide which interrupt vector invoked it.
the isr would begin with a switch(interrupt).
the context for both interrupt objects would point at the same device extension.
so it continue:
case context->readInterrupt:…
case context->writeInterrupt:…
is this correct?
if this is so,
why not simply write 2 isr’s
one for read and one for write interrupt?
thanks
assaf
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: $subst(‘Recip.EmailAddr’)
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com