Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268929AbUIHNV6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:21:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269003AbUIHNVu (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:21:50 -0400 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:8 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268929AbUIHNUG (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:20:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 14:20:02 +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: <20040908142002.A31831@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> <20040908141217.A31690@infradead.org> <20040908131720.GA22194@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: <20040908131720.GA22194@elte.hu>; from mingo@elte.hu on Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:17:20PM +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: 1369 Lines: 30 On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:17:20PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > not at all different model. 90% of the important drivers (no, > drivers/s390 doesnt count) are shared between multiple architectures > using the same interface: request_irq()/free_irq() and a handler with an > enumerated irq vector. Sure, but that's not the level we're talking about. The function we talk about compare to the vfs_* routines (when looking at the arches with i386-style generic irq code)( > > 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 > > it could be a bit like nommu - a noirq model. > > i agree with enabling an architecture to exclude _all_ of hardirq.c, but > specifying per-function is excessive - if an architecture can make use > of some of them then weak symbols will get rid of the rest. I never wanted to exclude individual functions. But when you look at arch/*/kernel/irq.c I don't see a reason for doing it at all. It makes sense to make this an all or nothing switch. - 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/