Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
* Eric W. Biederman <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks for doing this.
Yes. keeping this alive is good.
The practical question is how do we make this change without breaking
the drivers that use their irq argument.
the get_irq_regs() approach worked out really well. We should do a
get_irq_nr() and be done with it?
The problem are some drivers today pass in 0 for their irq number
to flag that they are calling the interrupt handler in a polling
mode (not from interrupt context?) so the same logic doesn't quite apply.
Do what you suggest would likely break those drivers.
How many of them do we have ? This is a wilful abuse of the API, so
its not a big damage if they break.
I would prefer to simply clean up the drivers such that
get_irqfunc_irq() and set_irqfunc_irq() are not needed.
One of the many reasons why I'm explicitly not pushing it upstream yet :)
Jeff
-
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]
