Re: [PATCH 1/9] irq-remove: core

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> writes:

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> writes:
Do you think set_irqfunc_irq() should be called at all the callsites of
set_irq_regs(), or one the fix you mention is applied, do you think current
model is sufficient?
Good question.  At first glance I think the call sites are ok, that
is where we have the information now.  Non-genirq architectures needs
work of course.

However given the weird poll case etc that either we need to take this
slow and delay this change until all of the drivers are fixed up, to
not need an irq parameter (as you suggested).  Or that we need to allow both
forms of irq handler to coexist temporarily.
After diving in, in the past couple of hours, I'm pretty confident we simply do
not need {get,set}_irqfunc_irq()

Sounds good.  That was my impression when I was looking at this kind of stuff.

'irq' argument is gone from the entire tree, save for

drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
drivers/scsi/sym53c416.c
drivers/scsi/NCR53C9x.c
drivers/scsi/NCR5380.c
drivers/net/hamradio/scc.c
drivers/ide/ide-io.c

So I'd say the task is within reach :)

All the irq handler cleanups have been checked into branch 'irq-cleanups', and 'irq-remove' branch is rebased on top of that.

	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]
  Powered by Linux