Re: [patch 0/7] Add IRQF_IRQPOLL_IRQ flag to allow irqpoll

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:01:44 +0200 (CEST) Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> 
> > * Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> [2007-03-24 00:21]:
> > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> > > 
> > > > * Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> [2007-03-23 23:15]:
> > > > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > irqpoll is broken on some architectures that don't use the IRQ 0 for the timer
> > > > > > interrupt like IA64. This patch adds a IRQF_IRQPOLL_IRQ flag.
> > > > > 
> > > > > emn, please, cannot we come up with a better name - one that doesn't have 
> > > > > "IRQ" 3 (!) times in it?...
> > > > 
> > > > Well, it was suggested by Andrew. What's your suggestion?
> > > 
> > > Purely esthetically (ehm, am I saying that?...) your original suggestion 
> > > to use IRQF_IRQPOLL looks better to me. Or even IRQF_POLL, but, maybe, 
> > > it's a bit too much of a simplification.
> > 
> > I personally don't care very much about the naming. So I think it's
> > Andrews final decision ...
> 
> Sure. And for him to have a better chance to do this, I'll fix his email 
> address too:-)
> 

I don't think I went as daringly far as to suggest the full name, but I
must admit that IRQF_IRQPOLL_IRQ is actually logical.