Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758733AbXEJHo3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 03:44:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756657AbXEJHoX (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 03:44:23 -0400 Received: from vervifontaine.sonytel.be ([80.88.33.193]:64681 "EHLO vervifontaine.sonycom.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756587AbXEJHoW (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 03:44:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 09:44:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Andrew Morton , Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: Fixup hard_irq_disable semantics In-Reply-To: <20070510052620.EC36DDDF92@ozlabs.org> Message-ID: References: <20070510052620.EC36DDDF92@ozlabs.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 993 Lines: 25 On Thu, 10 May 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > This patch renames the raw hard_irq_{enable,disable} into > __hard_irq_{enable,disable} and introduces a higher level > hard_irq_disable() function that can be used by any code > to enforce that IRQs are fully disabled, not only lazy > disabled. Why did you rename hard_irq_enable() too? Isn't it more logical to have high-level hard_irq_disable() and hard_irq_enable(), and a special low-level __hard_irq_disable()? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- Sony Network and Software Technology Center Europe (NSCE) Geert.Uytterhoeven@sonycom.com ------- The Corporate Village, Da Vincilaan 7-D1 Voice +32-2-7008453 Fax +32-2-7008622 ---------------- B-1935 Zaventem, Belgium - 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/