mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*()
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:06:13 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1098270373.21028.9.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041020120140.J1047@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 21:01, Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:50:56PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > yenta_socket has always used it.  Its rather fundamental to the way
> > > that the PCMCIA core has worked for the last I don't know how many
> > > years.
> > > 
> > > Nothing new.  Maybe something in PPC64 land broke recently?
> > 
> > No, what happened is that until the big irq unification, ppc and ppc64
> > probe_* were no-ops. Probing of "ISA" irqs is a big no-no on most non
> > x86 architectures.
> 
> Well, I've no plans to rewrite that bit of PCMCIA anytime soon,
> especially as my time is very precious over the next two months
> or so.

I'm not asking you to do so :)

> Remember that PCMCIA effectively has its own IRQ router which requires
> the PCMCIA code to know which IRQs are physically connected and which
> aren't.  Unfortunately, there's no way to get that information as far
> as I know except by the published method in the code.

It's fine if the probe_* thing does nothing, though we could imagine a
specific arch callback at one point...

> So even if I had time to look at this, I doubt anything would change.
> I think it's a necessary evil.
-- 
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>


  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-20 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-20  7:08 [PATCH] Fix PREEMPT_ACTIVE definition Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20  8:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20  8:42   ` New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*() Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  8:48     ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20  8:53       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  9:20         ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20 10:56           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  9:31       ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-10-20  9:01     ` Russell King
2004-10-20 10:50       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 11:01         ` Russell King
2004-10-20 11:06           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2004-10-20 11:53           ` Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20 12:31             ` Russell King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1098270373.21028.9.camel@gaston \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome