[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070322150207.a35d3f15.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:02:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix irqpoll on IA64 (timer interrupt != 0)
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:23:21 +0100
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 14:09 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I think the term 'timer_interrupt' is a bit generic-sounding. Would it be
> > better to call it irqpoll_interrupt? After all, some architecture might
> > want to use, umm, the keyboard interrupt to trigger IRQ polling ;)
>
> Interesting thought, but in general I have to agree.
>
> > Also, the code presently passes the magic IRQ number into the generic IRQ
> > code. I wonder if we'd get a more pleasing result if we were to make the
> > generic IRQ code call _out_ to the architecture:
>
> > Then, ia64 can implement arch_is_irqpoll_irq() and it can do whatever it
> > wants in there.
> >
> > The __attribute__((weak)) thing adds a little bit of overhead, but I don't
> > think this is a fastpath?
>
> Well, depends what you consider a fastpath. When noirqdebug == 0, it is
> called on every interrupt.
>
OK, well the alternative is to do
extern bool __arch_irqpoll_irq(unsigned int irq);
#define arch_is_irqpoll_irq(irq) __arch_is_irqpoll_irq(irq)
in an ia64 header file and then do
#ifndef arch_is_irqpoll_irq
static inline bool arch_is_irqpoll_irq(unsigned irq)
{
return irq == 0;
}
#endif
in spurious.c
-
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