[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48093C01.1040505@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:25:37 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
CC: rmk@....linux.org.uk, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
kernel@...tstofly.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] ARM minor irq handler cleanups
Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 07:22:45PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> This change's main purpose is to prepare for the patchset in
>> jgarzik/misc-2.6.git#irq-remove, that explores removal of the
>> never-used 'irq' argument in each interrupt handler.
>
> What do you mean? I know at least one of two interrupt handlers
> in-tree that use their 'irq' arguments.
They can use new function get_irqfunc_irq(), similar to the existing
method of getting pt_regs for the tiny number of users who need that
sort of info, when pt_regs was removed.
But after having gone over, literally, every single interrupt handler in
the kernel, I can safely say that 99.8% never reference that argument,
and 0.1% that do already have the same information via another route.
That leaves only a few drivers that need it without modification, and
even fewer drivers that need it after modification.
Jeff
--
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