Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755715AbaBTSSA (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:18:00 -0500 Received: from mail-ve0-f178.google.com ([209.85.128.178]:57508 "EHLO mail-ve0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755691AbaBTSR5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:17:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <53063F09.9000102@free-electrons.com> References: <53063F09.9000102@free-electrons.com> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 19:17:56 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: llR2FvZCHchjtPFx1U8AIsLeYOI Message-ID: Subject: Re: How to get rid of IRQF_DISABLED for good? From: Levente Kurusa To: Michael Opdenacker Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2014-02-20 18:44 GMT+01:00 Michael Opdenacker : > Hi, > > In spite of the patches I have been sending (and resending!) over the > past months, there are still 118 occurrences of the idle IRQF_DISABLED > flag in the kernel code. This corresponds to 31 patches which haven't > been accepted yet. > > What would you advise to get rid of IRQF_DISABLED for good? > > * Send a treewide patch removing the last occurrences in one shot, > bypassing the regular maintainers? Who could take it? Andrew Morton would take it to his -mm tree. This, IMO, seems to be the best solution to circumvent unresponsive/uncaring maintainers. > * Remove the definition of IRQF_DISABLED to force the individual > maintainers (and out of tree drivers!) to update their code? It > could be a way of seeing which code isn't maintained any more ;) No, every single patch has to be 'bisectable' meaning that when you bisect you should be able to build every single patch as is. > * Continue to resend the patches for a few more cycles, until the > corresponding maintainers can no longer bear the discredit? Maybe once more, if they don't reply, send it to Andrew Morton as well and CC a few people who know your work is good so that they can ACK it. Oh and maybe you could add an __attribute__((deprecated)) to it, but I am not sure that's possible and/or correct. -- Regards, Levente Kurusa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/