Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Dec 2008 17:31:28 +0300 | From | Cyrill Gorcunov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH for -tip] irq: for_each_irq_desc() makes simplify |
| |
[KOSAKI Motohiro - Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 10:45:20PM +0900] | > [KOSAKI Motohiro - Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 09:41:54PM +0900] | > ... | > | Is this good idea? | > | this patch also tested on above three architecture. | > | | > | | > | === | > | Subject: [PATCH] irq: for_each_irq_desc() makes simplify | > | Impact: cleanup | > | | > | all for_each_irq_desc() usage point have !desc check. | > | then its check can move into for_each_irq_desc() macro. | > | | > | | > | Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> | > | CC: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> | > | CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> | > | --- | > | arch/x86/kernel/io_apic.c | 10 ---------- | > | drivers/xen/events.c | 3 --- | > | fs/proc/stat.c | 3 --- | > | include/linux/irqnr.h | 6 ++++-- | > | kernel/irq/autoprobe.c | 15 --------------- | > | kernel/irq/handle.c | 3 --- | > | kernel/irq/spurious.c | 5 ----- | > | 7 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) | > ... | > | > Hi Kosaki, | > | > the idea is that good indeed but I wonder if it possible | > to explain that we skip empty 'desk' in for_each_... name | > itself. Maybe for_each_irq_desc_defined :) Or something | > more convenient word instead of "defined"? | | "if (!desc) " mean this irqno don't have irq description. | so I think this name imply mean skipping no irq desctiption element. | | Actually, on CONFIG_SPARSEIRQ, desc is filled in dynamically after booting. | then "defined" is a bit misleading word. |
So if I would need to iterate over all descriptors including empty I need to type all this long for(;;) form again? For me for_each_irq_desc implies to iterate over each irq_desc allocated regardles of internal descriptor data. For example in list_struct we have a special test if entry is empty or not. So I think hiding details is not that good (and that is why I was asking for more descriptive macro name). BUT if it really supposed to behave like that then I don't object :)
- Cyrill -
| |