From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDFF9DDEE9 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:45:03 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:44:49 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] powerpc: Move #ifdef'ed body of do_IRQ() into a separate function Message-ID: <20090429114448.GA13129@lst.de> References: <20090425181823.GA10481@lst.de> <1240879747.11027.2.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1240879747.11027.2.camel@localhost> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:49:07AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Sat, 2009-04-25 at 20:18 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:31:37AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQSTACKS > > > > Wasn't there a plan to make CONFIG_IRQSTACKS the unconditional default? > > Not sure. Looks like the 64-bit configs all turn it on, and all but one > or two of the 32-bit configs don't. Yeah, but do they have a reason not to turn it on? Having irqstacks is a lot safer than no having it because the stack useage is a lot more predictable. And not having to maintain two codepathes is also a benefit all by itself.