Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270288AbUJTJBc (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2004 05:01:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270138AbUJTI4n (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:56:43 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:37790 "EHLO gate.crashing.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270067AbUJTIzR (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:55:17 -0400 Subject: Re: New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*() From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Paul Mackerras , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Anton Blanchard , Linux Kernel list , Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20041020084838.GA25798@elte.hu> References: <16758.3807.954319.110353@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20041020083358.GB23396@elte.hu> <1098261745.6263.9.camel@gaston> <20041020084838.GA25798@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1098262403.6278.16.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:53:24 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 847 Lines: 23 On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 18:48, Ingo Molnar wrote: > yeah. I've put it into a separate autoprobe.c file specifically for that > reason, you can exclude it in the Makefile and can provide your own > architecture version. Or should we make the no-autoprobing choice > generic perhaps? I like this later option... How may archs actually had autoprobing implemented and actually used ? Well, I'll do some grep'ing around tonight as I do the NO_IRQ stuff and see what makes more sense. I don't think an arch that didn't have autoprobing needs it now, besides, it's not exactly a reliable mecanism... Ben. - 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/