From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Ungerer Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k: switch to using asm-generic/hardirq.h Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:58:48 +1000 Message-ID: <4C96F818.3030903@snapgear.com> References: <201009070500.o8750l71006902@goober.internal.moreton.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from dalsmrelay2.nai.com ([205.227.136.216]:63240 "HELO dalsmrelay2.nai.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751370Ab0ITF77 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 01:59:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, gerg@uclinux.org Hi Geert, On 20/09/10 02:32, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 07:00, Greg Ungerer wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> Is there any reason that the m68k arch cannot use the generic >> hardirq.h support? >> >> It looks to be the same, unless I am missing something. > > Unfortunately it's not that simple: the m68k core doesn't use the > generic hardirq > code yet. Fixing header files it not enough. Oh, yeah, I get that. I did this based on visual inspection of the two files, arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq_mm.h and include/asm-generic/hardirq.h. They are almost the same (the irq_cpustat_t definition is identical). Outside of a superfluous definition of ack_bad_irq the only difference is the include of linux/irq.h. Is this enough to cause problems? >> If it can then it is simple to merge the non-mmu and mmu >> versions of hardirq.h. > > yeah, one more reason to migrate to generic hardirqs... Indeed :-) Regards Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@snapgear.com SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 8 Gardner Close FAX: +61 7 3217 5323 Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com