Re: [PATCH, RAW] IRQ: Maintain irq number globally rather than passing to IRQ handlers

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On 10/6/06, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In contrast, the irq argument itself is really no different from the
> cookie we pass in on registration - it's just passing it back to the
> driver that requested the thing. So unlike "regs", there's not really
> anything strange about it, and there's nothing really "wrong" with having
> it there.
>
> So I'm not at all as convinced about this one.

But drivers rarely care about exact IRQ that caused their interrupt
routines to be called. I looked at some of them and they normally use
it just to print warnings which is not critical (and data can still be
retrieved form elsewhere). And without it the only argument can very
nicely be passed via a register (if regparm is allowed).

Drivers that truly need to know IRQ can have it added to dev_id cookie
and use separate dev_ids.

--
Dmitry
-
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/