[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1809101536410.1292@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 15:37:31 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller
Driver
On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 08, 2018 at 12:46:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Sep 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just as before: NAK to entirely pointless abstractions. Please stop
> > > > beating the dead horse.
> > >
> > > I disagree. These interrupts very well fit into the percpu interupt
> > > mechanics and that allows them to be handled by all the generic mechanisms
> > > as any other interrupt.
> >
> > Just a few weeks ago you said the contrary:
> >
> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/2018-August/000943.html
>
> Sigh. Yes. Now that you remind me.
Just for clarification. I had the impression that Anup was trying to wire
up more than just the timer interrupt, but that doesn't seem to be the
case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists