From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753548Ab2LQRMJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:12:09 -0500 Received: from tex.lwn.net ([70.33.254.29]:37891 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751990Ab2LQRMI (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:12:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:14:39 -0700 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Marcos Lois =?UTF-8?B?QmVybcO6ZGV6?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jake Edge Subject: Re: Question about using new request_threaded_irq Message-ID: <20121217101439.399a3e8d@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <50CF4313.1010706@gmail.com> References: <50CF361A.1030203@gmail.com> <20121217083759.0cbed418@lwn.net> <50CF4313.1010706@gmail.com> Organization: LWN.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:06:43 +0100 Marcos Lois Bermúdez wrote: > I'm a bit confusing because i see a outdated page that talks about this > new IRQ API, but now i see that it's very outdated: > > http://lwn.net/Articles/302043/ I normally encourage people to rely on LWN for everything, of course - even the articles that Jake writes :) But that *was* four years ago; a lot of things change in the kernel in that much time. Out of curiosity, I looked back at the old thread and the article did, indeed, accurately match the API proposed at that time. The order of those arguments got switched at some later point. The moral of the story: when in doubt, check the source. jon