From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 721B4C4BA24 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D2324697 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728806AbgB0Kbb (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 05:31:31 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:33892 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728680AbgB0Kbb (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 05:31:31 -0500 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1j7GRn-0007Oi-T2; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:31:15 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4CE0E10409C; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:31:15 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: afzal mohammed , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org Cc: Julia Lawall , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] genirq: Remove setup_irq() In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:31:15 +0100 Message-ID: <87y2somido.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Afzal, afzal mohammed writes: > While trying to understand internals of irq handling, came across a > thread [1] in which tglx was referring to avoid usage of setup_irq(). > Existing callers of setup_irq() reached mostly via 'init_IRQ()' & > 'time_init()', while memory allocators are ready by 'mm_init()'. > > Hence instances of setup_irq() is replaced by request_irq() & > setup_irq() (along with remove_irq()) definition deleted in the last > patch. > > Seldom remove_irq() usage has been observed coupled with setup_irq(), > wherever that has been found, it too has been replaced by free_irq(). thanks a lot for tackling this! Vs. merging this series, I suggest the following approach: - Resubmit the individual changes as single patches or small series to the relevant maintainers and subsystem mailing lists. They have no dependency on a core change and can be applied where they belong to. - After 5.6-rc6, verify which parts have made their way into linux-next and resubmit the ignored ones as a series to me along with the removal of the core parts. That way we can avoid conflicting changes between subsystems and the tip irq/core branch as much as possible. Thanks, tglx