[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200903021148.41405.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:48:40 -0800
From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, me@...ipebalbi.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
felipe.balbi@...ia.com, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
sameo@...nedhand.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: assert that irq handlers are indeed run in hardirq context.
On Monday 02 March 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > But these handlers are *NOT* running in hardirq context;
>
> Ah, let us stop this tinkering dead in its tracks
How about providing adequate support for threaded IRQs
first, before breaking code that's been working for the
last few years?
This patch fails the "no regressions" test. And with
no reason given -- not even a bad one.
For what it's worth: NAK.
- Dave
--
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