linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Is _do_IRQ() not needed anymore ?

To: vagabon.xyz@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Is _do_IRQ() not needed anymore ?
From: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:41:02 +0900 (JST)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <cda58cb80612010219p50334a6cj4a797dcd608376ed@mail.gmail.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cda58cb80612010206r51d319a1x72105981d900068a@mail.gmail.com> <20061201.191049.63741937.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp> <cda58cb80612010219p50334a6cj4a797dcd608376ed@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 11:19:34 +0100, "Franck Bui-Huu" <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> ok bad example. Why not making the select thing part of the platform
> config like this ?
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/Kconfig b/arch/mips/Kconfig
> index 5ff94e5..8565533 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/mips/Kconfig
> @@ -233,6 +233,7 @@ config LASAT
>         select SYS_SUPPORTS_32BIT_KERNEL
>         select SYS_SUPPORTS_64BIT_KERNEL if EXPERIMENTAL
>         select SYS_SUPPORTS_LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +       select GENERIC_HARDIRQS_NO__DO_IRQ
> 
>  config MIPS_ATLAS
>         bool "MIPS Atlas board"
> @@ -913,6 +914,10 @@ config SYS_SUPPORTS_BIG_ENDIAN
>  config SYS_SUPPORTS_LITTLE_ENDIAN
>         bool
> 
> +config GENERIC_HARDIRQS_NO__DO_IRQ
> +       bool
> +       default n
> +
>  config IRQ_CPU
>         bool

This looks good for me.

Also, if you selected GENERIC_HARDIRQS_NO__DO_IRQ, you can remove .end
handler.  But adding "#ifdef GENERIC_HARDIRQS_NO__DO_IRQ" for each
.end might be slightly ugly...

---
Atsushi Nemoto

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>