Re: [PATCH and RFC] Remove request_8xxirq

[Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 11:48:23AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I jump into the discussion as well.
>
> On 06/21/2002 12:10 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> >Well, I looked at it (after I sent but before your mail) and it wasn't a
> >patch but some cut'n paste bits.  And to possibly Dan's dismay I don't
> >always agree with his opinions now :)
> >
>
> I first wanted to present my ideas ... before I prepare and send a
> patch.

For future reference, unified diffs are the preferred way to present
ideas which you've already implemented. :)

> >Well, having never used RTAI (and by looking at the 'patch' at
> >http://lists.linuxppc.org/linuxppc-embedded/200110/txt00002.txt) I don't
> >get it..
>
> RTAI and RTLinux actually use the "irq_desc[].handler" functions to
> handle the interrupts and with the previous cpm_* functions it was
> non-trivial to access CPM interrupts within RTAI because they are
> handled in a separate interface.

Ah, which is why you just expanded things the way you did..  Which works
for that context but still leaves the larger problem of request_irq()
panic()'ing on unknown interrupt numbers.

[snip]
> I understand DAN's argument, that the usage of an offset can be quite
> messy especially during driver development but I cannot see a simple
> way around it without breaking the (PC) "request_irq" function.

Well maybe Dan will get encouraged enough to try and properly fix
request_irq() and break some of the legacy PC drivers in 2.5 again. :)

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/