On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 13:50 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 13:30:25 +0200
> Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 12:03 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> > > > Looks pretty sane from a quick scan.
> > > >
> > > > - request_irq() can use GFP_KERNEL?
> > >
> > > Probably, but the genirq implementation also uses GFP_ATOMIC.
> >
> > Is there a good reason, why AVR32 needs its own interrupt handling
> > implementation ?
>
> No, not really. At least not after the genirq stuff went in. I used to
> be a bit concerned about the generic irq code being too heavyweight,
> but I think handle_simple_irq() might be just what we need for
> chip-internal interrupt handling.
>
> > >From a short glance there's nothing which can not be handled by the
> > generic code. Also there are a couple of things missing -e.g.
> > recursive enable/disable_irq() handling.
>
> You're probably right. I'll see if I can get it converted to genirq
> one of the next days.
Good. If there are any questions or things you find missing, don't
hesitate to ask.
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
