Re: [PATCH] irq: Export symbol no_action()

[Alexander Shiyan]

+ÑÑ Arnd Bergmann

ÐÑÐÑÐÐÐ,  4 ÐÐÑÑÐ 2014, 16:46 +01:00 ÐÑ Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2014, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> 
> > ÐÑÐÑÐÐÐ,  4 ÐÐÑÑÐ 2014, 12:05 +01:00 ÐÑ Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > > On Sat, 1 Mar 2014, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This will allow to use dummy IRQ handler no_action() from
> > > > drivers compiled as module. For example, dummy handler is could
> > > > be used for drivers that use ARM FIQ interrupts.
> > > 
> > > And why exactly requires a driver which uses ARM FIQ interrupts the
> > > no_action implementation?
> >
>  
> > FIQ Interrupt handler is not used in this function. In FIQ case this
> > is just a dummy declaration. Real handler is assigned by using the
> > set_fiq_handler().
> 
> Why do you need a dummy declaration at all?
> 
> set_fiq_handler() is completely detached from the generic interrupt
> subsystem.

Some limitations of hardware, such as bit interleaving for normal and
FIQ interrupts for mask/status registers, led to the implement single
driver for interrupt handling.
As a result, all interrupts can be described equally, and single mechanism
is used for the request/free and enable/disable.
Correct me if I'm wrong. Driver that implements it, resent several times
and expect comments within 3 months [1], you are the only one person,
Thomas, specified as maintainer for this subsystem.
I repeat, if I'm wrong in the implementation, let's fix this.

[1]: http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=139132855024699

Thanks.
---
N‹§²æ¸›yú²X¬¶ÇvØ–)Þ{.nlj·¥Š{±‘êX§¶›¡Ü}©ž²ÆzÚj:+v‰¨¾«‘êZ+€Êzf£¢·hšˆ§~†­†Ûÿû®w¥¢¸?™¨è&¢)ßf”ùy§m…á«a¶Úÿ0¶ìå