Re: [PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add IRQ affinity notifiers

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 20:47 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS)
> > 
> > The whole affinity thing is SMP and GENERIC_HARDIRQS only anyway, so
> > what's the point of this ifdeffery ?
> 
> The intent is that code using this can be compiled even if those config
> options are not set.  The work_struct is not needed in that case.  I
> think this is probably pointless though.

Yup, work_struct is defined for the !SMP and !GENERIC_HARDIRQS case as
well :)
 
> > > +        struct work_struct work;
> > > +#endif
> > > +        void (*notify)(struct irq_affinity_notify *, const cpumask_t *mask);
> > > +        void (*release)(struct kref *ref);
> > > +};
> > > +
> > 
> > > +/**
> > > + *	irq_set_affinity_notifier - control notification of IRQ affinity changes
> > > + *	@irq:		Interrupt for which to enable/disable notification
> > > + *	@notify:	Context for notification, or %NULL to disable
> > > + *			notification.  Function pointers must be initialised;
> > > + *			the other fields will be initialised by this function.
> > > + *
> > > + *	Must be called in process context.  Notification may only be enabled
> > > + *	after the IRQ is allocated but before it is bound with request_irq()
> > 
> > Why? And if there is that restriction, then it needs to be
> > checked. But I don't see why this is necessary.
> 
> Which restriction?

  Notification may only be enabled after the IRQ is allocated but
  before it is bound with request_irq()

After IRQ is allocated is obvious, but why needs it to be done
_before_ request_irq() ?

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/