Re: [PATCH] Support IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag in set_irq_chained_handler()
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Fri Mar 18 2011 - 16:39:55 EST
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, eha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Esben Haabendal <eha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Handle IRQ_NOAUTOEN in __set_irq_handler() (ie. for
> set_irq_chained_handler()) instead of just silently ignoring it, and in
> the same way as is done in __setup_irq() (ie. request_irq()).
> This give a more consistent interface, and also adheres better to
> the rule of least surprise.
Well, that might be less surprising for you, but you will be surprised
that such a change would be a real big surprise for all users of
chained handlers in arch/arm. They simply would not work anymore.
So we _cannot_ change the semantics here. All we can do is document
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/