From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751789AbdFTU0B (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:26:01 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f170.google.com ([209.85.128.170]:32835 "EHLO mail-wr0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751025AbdFTUZ6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:25:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 22:25:52 +0200 From: Daniel Lezcano To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, peterz@infradead.org, rafael@kernel.org, nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, Mark Rutland , Vineet Gupta , Marc Zyngier , Patrice Chotard , Kukjin Kim , Javier Martinez Canillas , Christoffer Dall , Paolo Bonzini , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Russell King , Richard Cochran , Ray Jui , Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Hannes Reinecke , "moderated list:ARM PORT" , "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCH..." , "moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG EXYNO..." Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 1/3] irq: Allow to pass the IRQF_TIMER flag with percpu irq request Message-ID: <20170620202552.GA1812@mai> References: <20170612135108.GD2261@mai> <1497275529-23565-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 04:05:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > But, the API request_percpu_irq does not allow to pass a flag, hence specifying > > if the interrupt type is a timer. > > > > Add a function request_percpu_irq_flags() where we can specify the flags. The > > request_percpu_irq() function is changed to be a wrapper to > > request_percpu_irq_flags() passing a zero flag parameter. > > And exactly this change wants to be a separate patch. We do not make whole > sale changes this way. You should know that already and someone pointed > that out to you in some of the earlier versions. > > > -int request_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, > > - const char *devname, void __percpu *dev_id) > > +int request_percpu_irq_flags(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, > > The function name sucks. The first time I read it, it meant request the per > cpu irq flags, which is not what you aim at, right? > > Please make that __request_percpu_irq() for now and on -rc1 time provide a > patch set to convert all current request_percpu_irq() users to have the > extra argument and then remove the __request_percpu_irq() intermediate. Ok, I will the change this way. What about 2/3 and 3/3? Is it possible to take them with the __request_percpu_irq change? -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog