From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*()
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:01:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041020120140.J1047@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098269455.20955.1.camel@gaston>; from benh@kernel.crashing.org on Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:50:56PM +1000
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:50:56PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > yenta_socket has always used it. Its rather fundamental to the way
> > that the PCMCIA core has worked for the last I don't know how many
> > years.
> >
> > Nothing new. Maybe something in PPC64 land broke recently?
>
> No, what happened is that until the big irq unification, ppc and ppc64
> probe_* were no-ops. Probing of "ISA" irqs is a big no-no on most non
> x86 architectures.
Well, I've no plans to rewrite that bit of PCMCIA anytime soon,
especially as my time is very precious over the next two months
or so.
Remember that PCMCIA effectively has its own IRQ router which requires
the PCMCIA code to know which IRQs are physically connected and which
aren't. Unfortunately, there's no way to get that information as far
as I know except by the published method in the code.
So even if I had time to look at this, I doubt anything would change.
I think it's a necessary evil.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
2.6 Serial core
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-20 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-20 7:08 [PATCH] Fix PREEMPT_ACTIVE definition Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20 8:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20 8:42 ` New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*() Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20 8:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 9:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20 10:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 9:31 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-10-20 9:01 ` Russell King
2004-10-20 10:50 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 11:01 ` Russell King [this message]
2004-10-20 11:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 11:53 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20 12:31 ` Russell King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041020120140.J1047@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.