From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: First steps towards making NO_IRQ a generic concept
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 10:05:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051103170559.GB23749@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051103162059.GA495@elte.hu>
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 05:20:59PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ok, understood. I'm wondering, why is there any need to do a PCI_NO_IRQ?
> Why not just a generic NO_IRQ. It's not like we can or want to make them
> different in the future. The interrupt vector number is a generic thing
> that attaches to the platform via request_irq() - there is nothing 'PCI'
> about it. So the PCI layer shouldnt pretend it has its own IRQ
> abstraction - the two are forcibly joined. The same goes for
> pci_valid_irq() - we should only have valid_irq(). Am i missing
> anything?
The last patch in this vein will delete PCI_NO_IRQ, replacing it with
NO_IRQ. To make that final patch small, I wanted to introduce an
abstraction that PCI drivers could use. Possibly it's not well thought
out. Do you think we should put in the explicit compares against
PCI_NO_IRQ as we find drivers that care and then do a big sweep when we
think we've found them all?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-03 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-03 14:49 First steps towards making NO_IRQ a generic concept Matthew Wilcox
2005-11-03 14:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2005-11-03 15:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-11-03 16:02 ` Matthew Wilcox
2005-11-03 16:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-11-03 17:05 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2005-11-03 20:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-11-03 14:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2005-11-03 17:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-11-03 14:52 ` Matthew Wilcox
2005-11-03 14:52 ` Matthew Wilcox
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=20051103170559.GB23749@parisc-linux.org \
--to=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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.