lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver
    On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 11:20:49AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > Not for any device driver, though.
    >
    > It's used entirely internally, and it doesn't even use
    > "request_irq()". It uses the magic internal "setup_irq()" and never
    > *ever* exposes irq0 as anything that a driver can see.
    >
    > That's what matters. You can use irq0 in ARM land all you like, AS
    > LONG AS IT'S SOME HIDDEN INTERNAL USE. No drivers. No *nothing* that
    > ever uses that absolutely *idiotic* NO_IRQ crap.
    >
    > In fact, you may be *forced* to use what is "physically" irq0 - it's
    > just that you should never expose it as such to drivers. And x86
    > doesn't.
    >
    > So Russell, if you think this has anything to do with NO_IRQ, and how
    > x86 isn't doing things right, you're wrong. It's just like the
    > internal exception thing, or the magical "cascade interrupt", or the
    > "x87 exception mapped through the PIC". They are magic hidden
    > interrupts that are set up in one place (well, one place *each*), and
    > are never exposed anywhere else.
    >
    > The problem with NO_IRQ is that stupid "we expose our mind-numbingly
    > stupid interfaces across the whole kernel".
    >
    > x86 never did that. ARM still does. x86 doesn't have to fix anything. ARM does.

    Remember you said that I shouldn't take things personally? Well,
    this is one issue I really don't care about. I don't think any
    platform I _actually_ have will be impacted by any change in this
    area. Other platform maintainers may have their own issues but
    that's not _my_ problem.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-12-06 21:03    [W:0.024 / U:1.440 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site