From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sam@ravnborg.org (Sam Ravnborg)
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:05:38 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v5 00/27] irq_domain generalization and rework
In-Reply-To: <20120216232648.GM27825@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1329383368-12122-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
 <20120216145219.0f1c1b98.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <20120216232648.GM27825@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20120217180538.GA11520@merkur.ravnborg.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

> > 
> > /*
> >  * Please do not include this file in generic code.  There is currently
> >  * no requirement for any architecture to implement anything held
> >  * within this file.
> >  *
> >  * Thanks. --rmk
> >  */
> > 
> > A quick grep indicates that we've lost this battle ;) Is the comments
> > still true?  Should we stop discouraging inclusion of linux/irq.h? 
> > Does anyone even know that it's discouraged ;)
> 
> It's still true for any platform which hasn't been converted to genirq,
> as such a platform would not have asm/hw_irq.h.

In-tree only s390 is not using genirq.
All the rest are converted and provide hw_irq.h -
most of the new archs provide hw_irq via asm-generic so it does
not show up unless you look in the Kbuild file,.

	Sam