On Fri, 09 Feb 2001, Pete Popov wrote:
> There's a dozen copies of "irq.c", and a few more files that do the same
> thing but are named differently. The irq.c in arch/mips/kernel doesn't
> seem to be used by any system. The PowerPC also has lots of variants
> also, but I believe they have a single irq.c file that all systems use.
> So I guess my question is, is anyone using arch/mips/kernel/irq.c, and
> does everyone plan on moving to that file (which seems like the right
> thing to do).
I've noticed that arch/i386/kernel/irq.c has this note on it:
* (mostly architecture independent, will move to kernel/irq.c in 2.5.)
* IRQs are in fact implemented a bit like signal handlers for the kernel.
* Naturally it's not a 1:1 relation, but there are similarities.
My internal code uses this as a template, in anticipation of this move;
assuming this will happen in 2.5, does it make sense to do an intermediate move
to a common mips/kernel/irq.c?
If it does, I'd like to see mips/kernel/irq.c updated to more closely match the
i386 version, but I'm curious what other people think.