[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251112180920.00005312@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:09:20 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Mark
Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "Rafael J.
Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, "Saravana
Kannan" <saravanak@...gle.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Sven Peter <sven@...nel.org>, Janne Grunau
<j@...nau.net>, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>, James Clark
<james.clark@...aro.org>, Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, "Alexandru
Elisei" <alexandru.elisei@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/26] genirq: Merge
irqaction::{dev_id,percpu_dev_id}
On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 13:29:29 +0100
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org> wrote:
> When irqaction::percpu_dev_id was introduced, it was hoped that it
> could be part of an anonymous union with dev_id, as the two fields
> are mutually exclusive.
>
> However, toolchains used at the time were often showing terrible
> support for anonymous unions, breaking the build on a number of
> architectures. It was therefore decided to keep the two fields separate
> and address this down the line.
>
> 14 years later, the compiler dark age is over, and there is universal
> support for anonymous unions. Let's get a whole pointer back that can
> immediately be spent on something else.
>
> Tested-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
I'm glad I either never saw that anon union problem or have blanked it from
my mind.
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists