On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:52:19 UTC, in fa.linux.kernel Ingo Molnar
wrote:
>
>* Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > I don't personally mind the patch, I just wanted to bring that issue
>> > up.
>>
>> yup. Perhaps we could add
>>
>> #define IRQ_HANDLERS_DONT_USE_PTREGS
>>
>> so that out-of-tree drivers can reliably do their ifdefing.
>
>i'd suggest we do something like:
>
> #define __PT_REGS
>
>so that backportable drivers can do:
>
> static irqreturn_t irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id __PT_REGS)
>
>instead of an #ifdef jungle. Older kernel bases can define __PT_REGS in
>their interrupt.h (or in the backported driver's header, in one place)
>
> #ifndef __PT_REGS
> # define __PT_REGS , struct pt_regs *regs
> #endif
>
>this would minimize the direct impact in the source-code.
Has this or something like it been sprinkled with penguin pee? I'm
one of those misguided out-of-tree maintainers. I dont' use pt_regs
but like warning-free compiles - and a single code module when
possible.
Thanks,
Bill
--
William D Waddington
[email protected]
"Even bugs...are unexpected signposts on
the long road of creativity..." - Ken Burtch
-
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]
