lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [git patch] free_irq() fixes
On 23-04-08 02:16, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> If it goes like the regs removal in one big patch around -rc1 into your
>> tree this shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Well, the regs removal had a real upside (it wasn't even sensible for all
> irq types), and really nobody used it apart from "system users" (ie Sysrq
> etc).
>
> I'm still waiting for anybody mentioning any upside at _all_ on removing
> "irq".

Saves another 4 bytes of stack? :-/ Seriously, Jeff can probably better
answer himself but when this was posted before:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/19/23

Eric Biederman said it fit nicely into his "nefarious plan of making
everything use a struct irq pointer". A later mention:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/19/66

got strong ACKs from Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar and Greg KH. Remember due
to working on a local driver at the time and deleting the "irq" argument
usage from its handler (unneccesarily used in a debugging printk) from it in
response.

My own view is that if it's not really overly painful this does make for a
nice API cleanliness thing -- the IRQ level is only relevant to the lower
level generic handler code not the "driver endpoint handler" and not passing
it in the first place thereby is in keeping with this layering.

Rene.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-24 03:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans