Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] include/linux/irq.h: #include <linux/smp.h>

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 11:11:14PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:48:06PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:33:21PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 11:04:22AM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 02:41:33AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > Yes, it's basically always wrong to include asm/foo.h when linux/foo.h
> > > > > exists. 
> > > > 
> > > > There's always an exception to every rule.  linux/irq.h is that
> > > > exception for the above rule.
> > > 
> > > Why?
> > 
> > /*
> >  * 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
> >  */
> > 
> > Using linux/irq.h instead of asm/irq.h _breaks_ architectures
> > which do not use the generic irq code.
> > 
> > Basically, linux/irq.h should have been called asm-generic/irq.h.
> 
> I'm not getting your point.

The point is _exactly_ as the above quotation between Andrew Morton
and myself.  I'm sure it's not me being thick because it's absolutely
damned obvious from the above.

Andrew said: "Yes, it's basically always wrong to include asm/foo.h
when linux/foo.h exists."

That statement is a rule.  I assert that this is an incorrect statement
and I assert that there is a proven case where this statement is incorrect.

Hence, to avoid people reading Andrew's misleading statement, I followed
up on precisely _that_ point and _that_ point alone.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core