Re: [PATCH for -tip] irq: for_each_irq_desc() makes simplify

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> [KOSAKI Motohiro - Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 11:43:45PM +0900]
> | > | "if (!desc) " mean this irqno don't have irq description.
> | > | so I think this name imply mean skipping no irq desctiption element.
> | > |
> | > | Actually, on CONFIG_SPARSEIRQ, desc is filled in dynamically after booting.
> | > | then "defined" is a bit misleading word.
> | > |
> | >
> | > So if I would need to iterate over all descriptors including empty
> | > I need to type all this long for(;;) form again?
> | 
> | We already have for_each_irq_nr() for this purpose ;-)
> 
> Which is not shorter form of desc iterator in turn :-)
> 
> Since the original for_each_irq_desc didn't check for NULL
> desc's I think the better would to name it like for_each_irq_desc_safe
> or for_each_irq_desc_inuse then.

but before CONFIG_SPARSEIRQ feature age, for_each_irq_desc() guaranteed
to return !NULL value.
recently CONFIG_SPARSEIRQ break this assumption. I hope to restore it.

In addition, if we make both for_each_irq_desc() and for_each_irq_desc().
for_each_irq_desc() become unused macro.
from cleanup view, unused function/macro is not preferred.

> 
> Nevermind, Kosaki, since it's only me who is confused I should
> just shut up :-)




--
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/