From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/27] irq_domain generalization and rework Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 14:52:19 -0800 Message-ID: <20120216145219.0f1c1b98.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1329383368-12122-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1329383368-12122-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Grant Likely Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Thomas Gleixner , Milton Miller , Rob Herring , Russell King List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 02:09:01 -0700 Grant Likely wrote: > > This series generalizes the "irq_host" infrastructure from powerpc > so that it can be used by all architectures and renames it to "irq_domain". drivers/mfd/twl-core.c is fairly horked on i386 allmodconfig: drivers/mfd/twl-core.c: In function 'twl_probe': drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1218: error: implicit declaration of function 'irq_alloc_descs' drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1226: error: implicit declaration of function 'irq_domain_add_legacy' drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1227: error: 'irq_domain_simple_ops' undeclared (first use in this function) drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1227: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1227: error: for each function it appears in.) This is today's linux-next so it has rmk's "ARM: omap: fix broken twl-core dependencies and ifdefs" in there, which looks like it attempts to repair this stuff. It's looking for things which are in both linux/irq.h and in linux/irqdomain.h. btw, Russell, regarding this comment in include/linux/irq.h: /* * 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 ;)