From: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
To: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com>
Cc: paul.mckenney@linaro.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
decot@googlers.com, amirv@mellanox.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] genirq: add IRQF_NONE
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:02:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130909040244.GA1157@leaf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1378698519-4780-1-git-send-email-michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com>
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 05:48:39AM +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote:
> What about adding an IRQF_NONE flag as in the below patch?
>
> I'm currently working on removing the use of the deprecated
> IRQF_DISABLED flag, and frequently have to replace
> IRQF_DISABLED by 0, typically in request_irq() arguments.
>
> Using IRQF_NONE instead of 0 would make the code more readable,
> at least for people reading driver code for the first time.
>
> Would it worth it?
>
> I'm sure this kind of idea has come up many times before...
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com>
I don't think it makes sense, no; it's a flags field, meant to receive a
set of flags, and 0 is the standard empty set of flags. I think
IRQF_NONE would actually reduce readability, especially for readers who
haven't seen it before, because it isn't immediately obvious that it
just corresponds to the 0 of "no flags". My first guess reading it
would be that it's some non-zero flag with some non-obvious semantic,
such as "don't actually allocate an IRQ", or something strange like
that.
- Josh Triplett
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-09 4:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-09 3:48 [RFC][PATCH] genirq: add IRQF_NONE Michael Opdenacker
2013-09-09 4:02 ` Josh Triplett [this message]
2013-09-09 4:40 ` Michael Opdenacker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130909040244.GA1157@leaf \
--to=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amirv@mellanox.com \
--cc=decot@googlers.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox