[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87k0i5b91c.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 12:20:31 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
catalin.marinas@....com, deanbo422@...il.com, green.hu@...il.com,
guoren@...nel.org, jonas@...thpole.se, kernelfans@...il.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
nickhu@...estech.com, palmer@...belt.com, paulmck@...nel.org,
paul.walmsley@...ive.com, peterz@...radead.org, shorne@...il.com,
stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi, tglx@...utronix.de,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de,
vgupta@...nel.org, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] irq: remove handle_domain_{irq,nmi}()
Hi Mark,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 19:02:21 +0100,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
>
> The handle_domain_{irq,nmi}() functions were oringally intended as a
> convenience, but recent rework to entry code across the kernel tree has
> demonstrated that they cause more pain than they're worth and prevent
> architectures from being able to write robust entry code.
>
> This series reworks the irq code to remove them, handling the necessary
> entry work consistently in entry code (be it architectural or generic).
[...]
Thanks for going through the pain of putting this together. The
couple of nits I mentioned notwithstanding:
Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
It'd be good to work out a merging strategy once this has seen a bit
of testing.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists