Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: SA_TRIGGER_* vs. SA_SAMPLE_RANDOM | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:14:02 +1000 |
| |
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 00:25 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 13:31 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:27:27 +0200 > > > > > I'll cook it up tomorrow. > > > > Thanks a lot Thomas. :) > > That's what I came up with: > > SA_INTERRUPT IRQF_IRQS_DISABLED > SA_SAMPLE_RANDOM IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM > SA_SHIRQ IRQF_SHARE_IRQ > SA_PROBEIRQ IRQF_PROBE_IRQ > SA_TRIGGER_LOW IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW > SA_TRIGGER_HIGH IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH > SA_TRIGGER_FALLING IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING > SA_TRIGGER_RISING IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING > SA_TRIGGER_MASK IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK > SA_TIMER IRQF_TIMER
Looks good to me. Do we want to keep a PERCPU flag too ? I don't really need it anymore on powerpc as I just use the percpu flow handler and I'm not allowing sharing of IPIs but others might.
Also, I'd like to store the IRQ types in the irq_desc regardless of the actions that have been registered or not. Any suggestion where to put that ? The current type values conflict with other desc->status bits at the moment unless we shift the whole thing up...
Ben.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |