From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932418AbXCVWCY (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:02:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932431AbXCVWCX (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:02:23 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:53721 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932418AbXCVWCW (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:02:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:02:07 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: tglx@linutronix.de Cc: Bernhard Walle , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix irqpoll on IA64 (timer interrupt != 0) Message-Id: <20070322150207.a35d3f15.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1174598601.10840.231.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070320150027.GA18143@strauss.suse.de> <20070322140922.a59bea5c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1174598601.10840.231.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:23:21 +0100 Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 14:09 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > I think the term 'timer_interrupt' is a bit generic-sounding. Would it be > > better to call it irqpoll_interrupt? After all, some architecture might > > want to use, umm, the keyboard interrupt to trigger IRQ polling ;) > > Interesting thought, but in general I have to agree. > > > Also, the code presently passes the magic IRQ number into the generic IRQ > > code. I wonder if we'd get a more pleasing result if we were to make the > > generic IRQ code call _out_ to the architecture: > > > Then, ia64 can implement arch_is_irqpoll_irq() and it can do whatever it > > wants in there. > > > > The __attribute__((weak)) thing adds a little bit of overhead, but I don't > > think this is a fastpath? > > Well, depends what you consider a fastpath. When noirqdebug == 0, it is > called on every interrupt. > OK, well the alternative is to do extern bool __arch_irqpoll_irq(unsigned int irq); #define arch_is_irqpoll_irq(irq) __arch_is_irqpoll_irq(irq) in an ia64 header file and then do #ifndef arch_is_irqpoll_irq static inline bool arch_is_irqpoll_irq(unsigned irq) { return irq == 0; } #endif in spurious.c