Re: SA_TRIGGER_* vs. SA_SAMPLE_RANDOM

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 13:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:47:45 +0100
> 
> > On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 04:00:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > We have the same hassle with SA_INTERRUPT. The question arises, if we
> > > should move the SA_XX flags for interrupts completely out of the signal
> > > SA name space. Rename to IRQ_xxx and put them into interrupt.h.
> > 
> > It would probably be sensible, but isn't there rather a lot of
> > drivers to update?  We could do it as a transitional thing -
> > #define the old SA_* names to the new in interrupt.h for a while.
> 
> This seems like a sane plan.
> 
> Someone skilled in sed and awk could probably do the whole
> current tree up in a short amount of time though :-)
> 
> I would then only keep the existing defines around for the
> sake of being polite to out-of-tree folks :)  Put them in
> the deprecation schedule, then zap them for good a few months
> from now.

I'll cook it up tomorrow.

	tglx


-
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/