Re: [PATCH 0/9] Remove 'irq' argument from all irq handlers

[Jeff Garzik]

Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > > * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > thanks for doing this.
> > > > Yes.  keeping this alive is good.
> > > >
> > > > The practical question is how do we make this change without breaking 
> > > > the drivers that use their irq argument.
> > > the get_irq_regs() approach worked out really well. We should do a 
> > > get_irq_nr() and be done with it?
> > The problem are some drivers today pass in 0 for their irq number
> > to flag that they are calling the interrupt handler in a polling
> > mode (not from interrupt context?) so the same logic doesn't quite apply.
> >
> > Do what you suggest would likely break those drivers.
>
> How many of them do we have ? This is a wilful abuse of the API, so
> its not a big damage if they break.

I would prefer to simply clean up the drivers such that 
get_irqfunc_irq() and set_irqfunc_irq() are not needed.

One of the many reasons why I'm explicitly not pushing it upstream yet :)

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/