[PATCH V10 1/3] irq: Allow to pass the IRQF_TIMER flag with percpu irq request

[daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)]

On 20/06/2017 22:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 04:05:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>> But, the API request_percpu_irq does not allow to pass a flag, hence specifying
>>>> if the interrupt type is a timer.
>>>>
>>>> Add a function request_percpu_irq_flags() where we can specify the flags. The
>>>> request_percpu_irq() function is changed to be a wrapper to
>>>> request_percpu_irq_flags() passing a zero flag parameter.
>>>
>>> And exactly this change wants to be a separate patch. We do not make whole
>>> sale changes this way. You should know that already and someone pointed
>>> that out to you in some of the earlier versions.
>>>
>>>> -int request_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
>>>> -		       const char *devname, void __percpu *dev_id)
>>>> +int request_percpu_irq_flags(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
>>>
>>> The function name sucks. The first time I read it, it meant request the per
>>> cpu irq flags, which is not what you aim at, right?
>>>
>>> Please make that __request_percpu_irq() for now and on -rc1 time provide a
>>> patch set to convert all current request_percpu_irq() users to have the
>>> extra argument and then remove the __request_percpu_irq() intermediate.
>>
>> Ok, I will the change this way.
>>
>> What about 2/3 and 3/3? Is it possible to take them with the
>> __request_percpu_irq change?
> 
> The rest looks ok. Please repost.

Ok, thanks.


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog