[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080423000529.GG28933@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 03:05:29 +0300
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rmk@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [git patch] free_irq() fixes
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 04:52:44PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Since the #irq-remove project involves removal of the 'irq' argument
> > > from interrupt handlers (unused 99.8% of the time),
> > [...]
> >
> > After going over every irq handler (read: almost every driver in the kernel,
> > plus arch code), my #irq-remove branch has confirmed what my gut already knew
> > -- the 'irq' argument is completely unused for almost every driver. So I was
> > taking that line of thought as far as it went.
>
> Ok, that's just not going to happen.
>
> What's the upside? Really?
>
> I can tell you the downsides:
> - tons of huge patches with ugly churn
>...
If it goes like the regs removal in one big patch around -rc1 into your
tree this shouldn't be a problem.
> Linus
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
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