Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267457AbUIHNRT (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:17:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268328AbUIHNNa (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:13:30 -0400 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:64519 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267457AbUIHNMU (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:12:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 14:12:17 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Scott Wood Subject: Re: [patch] generic-hardirqs.patch, 2.6.9-rc1-bk14 Message-ID: <20040908141217.A31690@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Scott Wood References: <20040908120613.GA16916@elte.hu> <20040908133445.A31267@infradead.org> <20040908124547.GA19231@elte.hu> <20040908134903.A31498@infradead.org> <20040908130552.GC20132@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20040908130552.GC20132@elte.hu>; from mingo@elte.hu on Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:05:52PM +0200 X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by phoenix.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1067 Lines: 24 On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:05:52PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > i disagree. It's the same as the VFS model: we have generic_block_bmap() > which a filesystem might or might not make use of. It's still around > even if no filesystem makes use of it but do we care? I'd prefer fixing > our linking logic to get rid of unused functions than complicating code > and the architecture with conditionals. Completley different model. VFS supports lots of filesystem implementation with one interface. IRQ code is a a single implementation for each architecture. > is there any architecture that cannot make use of kernel/hardirq.c _at > all_? s390 doesn't need it at all because it doesn't have the concept of hardirqs. At least arm{,26}, m68k{,nommu} and parisc and sparc{,64} use extremly different models for irq handling - 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/