On May 15, 2007, at 8:06 AM, Udi Brazilai wrote: Theoretically it could be ok to return false from the Filter() in such a case and waive the secondary handler, but this contradicts with the implied role of Filter() which is to determine where the interrupt came from. This could result in OS code seeing an interrupt that nobody claims responsibility for; a paranoid OS could assume that the interrupt remains unacknowledged in the HW and choose to protect itself by disabling the interrupt source altogether (to prevent an infinite interrupt loop).
MacOS X is in generally fine mental health, so you can safely use the return value from your filter action to determine whether your interrupt event action should be run.
= Mike |
