Re: [patch] generic-hardirqs.patch, 2.6.9-rc1-bk14

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:05:52PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i disagree. It's the same as the VFS model: we have generic_block_bmap()
> which a filesystem might or might not make use of. It's still around
> even if no filesystem makes use of it but do we care? I'd prefer fixing
> our linking logic to get rid of unused functions than complicating code
> and the architecture with conditionals.

Completley different model.  VFS supports lots of filesystem implementation
with one interface.  IRQ code is a a single implementation for each
architecture.

> is there any architecture that cannot make use of kernel/hardirq.c _at
> all_?

s390 doesn't need it at all because it doesn't have the concept of hardirqs.

At least arm{,26}, m68k{,nommu} and parisc and sparc{,64} use extremly
different models for irq handling

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/