Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 07 Feb 2013 14:39:04 +0100 | From | Takashi Iwai <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 12/15] sound: add missing HAS_IOPORT and GENERIC_HARDIRQS dependencies |
| |
At Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:32:06 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100, > > > > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Why not just make CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS mandatory for all > > > > > platforms. It is use almost everywhere now. > > > > > > > > I wonder it, too... > > > > > > I haven't looked into it, but I doubt if that is possible without large > > > effort, if at all. s390 doesn't have any irq chips, nor something like > > > edge or level triggered irqs. > > > Instead we have floating interrupts. Does that fit into the concept of > > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS at all? > > > If so, we can give it a try, sure. But that won't happen any time soon. > > > > > > Or are you simply proposing we should have both, our own irq handling plus > > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS with dummy functions? > > > > I think you should use GENERIC_HARDIRQ just for PCI, and rename the s390 > > interrupt handling to something that does not conflict. I understand > > that the concepts are quite different, but with PCI support, you actually > > do get all the weird interrupt hardware. > > More importantly, some features provided by GENERIC_HARDIRQ are replacing > > the traditional interfaces now, e.g. devm_request_irq() is actually > > recommended over request_irq() for normal drivers these days, as it > > simplifies the error handling. > > That sounds reasonable. And a quick grep seems to indicate that s390 > is the last architecture with !GENERIC_HARDIRQS. > However having two completely different IRQ subsystems within one > architecture will bring up some interesting questions like e.g. > how should /proc/interrupts look like? Or /proc/stat:intr ? > > Jan considered turning GENERIC_HARDIRQS on for PCI support, but didn't. > I don't know why he didn't and since he left, we can't ask him anymore. > > So for the time being I'd appreciate it if we can simply add the > additional GENERIC_HARDIRQS dependencies where needed, since I consider > a working allmodconfig quite important. > Later on we should indeed try to switch to GENERIC_HARDIRQS and then > git rid of that config option completely. However I leave that to > Sebastian and Gerald who now take care of our PCI code ;)
OK, then I'll queue the sound patch to sound.git tree as is. If things get easier, let's fix them later.
thanks,
Takashi
| |