[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1172746048.11949.103.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 11:47:27 +0100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] killing the NR_IRQS arrays.
> > Similarly, in a pci device, one could imagine that the
> > struct pci_driver contains a irq_handler_t member that
> > is registered from the pci_device_probe() function
> > if present.
>
> Yes. There is some potential there. Although we would have to go
> through an extra hoop to make it a pci specific handler type.
Beware with that approach though. If you are on a shared IRQ line, when
do you start getting called when an IRQ happen (possibly for the "other"
device) ? As soon as you are bound to the device ? But that means
potentially before the driver internal data structures are fully
initialized...
I like the driver having in control the "hooking" of the irq handler,
thus, when it starts being capable of handling interrupts (even if they
aren't initiated by that driver's device).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists