[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200710222110.34768.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:10:34 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
On Monday 22 October 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Yes, it's always been ugly that we use unsigned long for this rather than
> abstracting it properly.
>
> However I'd prefer that we have some really good reason for introducing
> irq_flags_t now. Simply so that I don't needlessly spend the next two
> years wrestling with literally thousands of convert-to-irq_flags_t patches
> and having to type "please use irq_flags_t here" in hundreds of patch
> reviews. (snivel, wimper)
On a related note, should we encourage the use of spin_lock() and
spin_lock_irq() instead of spin_lock_irqsave() where possible?
On some architectures, accessing the interrupt flag is a heavyweight
operation, especially when running under a hypervisor, so a number
of drivers could benefit from being converted to not save the flags
at all instead of just changing the type of the flags variable.
Arnd <><
-
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