From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754603AbZAFQ3W (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:29:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751363AbZAFQ3N (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:29:13 -0500 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:57964 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751240AbZAFQ3M (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:29:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:29:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20090106.082913.97432854.davem@davemloft.net> To: mingo@elte.hu Cc: sam@ravnborg.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, yinghai@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de Subject: Re: irqnr fallout in gpiolib on sparc32 From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20090106125704.GC20407@elte.hu> References: <20090105135508.GB4190@elte.hu> <20090105.123734.137888898.davem@davemloft.net> <20090106125704.GC20407@elte.hu> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.1 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Ingo Molnar Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:57:04 +0100 > Sparc32 on the other hand had a clean IRQ layer long before x86 found its > desire for a clean genirq layer - so genirq is a nuisance for Sparc32 at > best and it deserves none of the not nice actions. What i am hoping for is > that perhaps the Sparc unification changed that equation. Not really, the unificiation didn't change much in this area. That doesn't change the fact that I do intend to genirq'ify sparc32 some time soon. :-)