From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: 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 10:48:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041020084838.GA25798@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098261745.6263.9.camel@gaston>
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> Do you have any objection if I send a patch making the whole
> probe_irq_* stuff optional on a CONFIG_ option ? (turning it into nops
> like we used to have on ppc until now, if the option isn't set).
>
> I really don't want to mess with that racy mecanism that makes sense
> for ISA only afaik, and it seems some drivers are trying to use it now
> that it's there (/me looks toward yenta_socket) and I'm afraid of the
> consequences since I cannot see how that thing can work properly in
> the first place ;)
yeah. I've put it into a separate autoprobe.c file specifically for that
reason, you can exclude it in the Makefile and can provide your own
architecture version. Or should we make the no-autoprobing choice
generic perhaps?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-20 9:01 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 [this message]
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
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=20041020084838.GA25798@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--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