From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965862AbcKJRhV (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:37:21 -0500 Received: from frisell.zx2c4.com ([192.95.5.64]:58370 "EHLO frisell.zx2c4.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754206AbcKJRhR (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:37:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 18:37:10 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Proposal: HAVE_SEPARATE_IRQ_STACK? To: Matt Redfearn Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, WireGuard mailing list , k@vodka.home.kg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Matt, On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Matt Redfearn wrote: > > I don't see a reason not to do this - I'm taking a look into it. Great thanks! This is good to hear. If you go into the arch/ directory and simply grep for "irq_stack", you can pretty easily base your implementation on a variety of other architectures' implementations. Jason