Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:47:58 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
That was a goofup. I proposed that we should add a #define
TWO_ARG_IRQ_HANDLERS (or whatever) and I think I actually wrote the
patch, but it got lost.
I agree it would be a kind thing to do in this case.
Yep, I was thinking that including
#define IRQ_HANDLER_V3
would be a good idea.
it sets a certain precedent though.... we don't do this for the 500
other API changes we do each release (see stable-api-nonsense)... so
this one is mostly arbitrary picked out
We do for include/linux/netdevice.h, see HAVE_xxx -- and we should do it
because the last irq handler change was a pain for backports, and this
makes life easier for the backporters. irq handling is probably far
more global than any other kernel API except kmalloc()
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]
