From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
mingo@elte.hu, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: enable_irq/disable_irq
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:06:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041026110632.GA12458@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041026034908.6e57dc30.akpm@osdl.org>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:49:08AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:20:18AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > As all platforms must provide enable_irq() and disable_irq() we should put
> > > the declarations in a generic header. Why not put them in
> > > linux/interrupt.h?
> >
> > I looked into that a few days ago, but unfortunately a few architectures
> > have inlined variants.
>
> So where's the official declaration of enable_irq()? For some
> architectures, linux/interrupt.h. For others, asm/irq.h. That's screwed.
>
> I suggest that we move this:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS
> extern void disable_irq_nosync(unsigned int irq);
> extern void disable_irq(unsigned int irq);
> extern void enable_irq(unsigned int irq);
> #endif
>
> out of interrupt.h and into each relevant asm/irq.h.
>
> Maybe. It still sucks.
Well, ingo just moved it from <asm/irq.h> to <linux/interrupt.h> protected
by CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS, but maybe we should move it back. Or say that
performance doesn't matter so much for these and they should be out of line
for all architectures.
What do the architecture maintainers think about this?
parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-26 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <20041026034908.6e57dc30.akpm@osdl.org>]
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=20041026110632.GA12458@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox