Messages in this thread | | | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] Remove setup_percpu_irq() & remove_percpu_irq | Date | Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:31:16 +0200 |
| |
Afzal,
afzal mohammed <afzal.mohd.ma@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 09:34:07PM +0530, afzal mohammed wrote: > >> While doing the removal of setup_irq(), it was observed that >> setup_percpu_irq() also can be removed similarly by replacing it w/ >> request_percpu_irq(), which does allocate memory. In the initial >> setup_irq() removal cover letters [1], it was mentioned that >> setup_percpu_irq() is untouched. >> >> After removing setup_irq(), it does not look good to let live >> setup_percpu_irq(), especially since it being a low hanging fruit. Hence >> replace setup_percpu_irq() by it's allocator equivalent. >> request_percpu_irq() cannot be used since all the users need to pass >> IRQF_TIMER flag, which it would not allow. Thus it's variant, >> __request_percpu_irq() is used. >> >> In addition to removing setup_percpu_irq() definition, >> remove_percpu_irq(), unused, is also removed. > > Do you feel that this series adds value ?, if not, i will abandon this > series.
7 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
is definitely worth it. There is no point in having two interfaces. I'll have a look at the changes later today.
Thanks,
tglx
| |