Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753216Ab1CVJFV (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 05:05:21 -0400 Received: from [77.233.226.4] ([77.233.226.4]:38790 "EHLO mail.doredevelopment.dk" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752922Ab1CVJFR (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 05:05:17 -0400 From: Esben Haabendal To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Esben Haabendal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag in set_irq_chained_handler() References: <1300435389-11048-1-git-send-email-eha@doredevelopment.dk> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:05:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Thomas Gleixner's message of "Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:39:40 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: <87hbavv83c.fsf@eha.doredevelopment.dk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1533 Lines: 38 Thomas Gleixner writes: > On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, eha@doredevelopment.dk wrote: > >> From: Esben Haabendal >> >> Handle IRQ_NOAUTOEN in __set_irq_handler() (ie. for >> set_irq_chained_handler()) instead of just silently ignoring it, and in >> the same way as is done in __setup_irq() (ie. request_irq()). >> >> This give a more consistent interface, and also adheres better to >> the rule of least surprise. > > Well, that might be less surprising for you, but you will be surprised > that such a change would be a real big surprise for all users of > chained handlers in arch/arm. They simply would not work anymore. How is that? I don't see any use of IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag in arch/arm at all. Is there some other way that IRQ_NOAUTOEN get's enabled in arch/arm? Or is my patch broken in some way that it does change irq handler setup when IRQ_NOAUTOEN is not set? The idea of the patch is that it will do exactly the same as before, unless you specifically set IRQ_NOAUTOEN before calling set_irq_chained_handler... > So we _cannot_ change the semantics here. All we can do is document > it. With the current semantics, how are one supposed to be able use set_irq_chained_handler without having the handler enabled immediately? /Esben -- 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/