Re: [PATCH 12/15] sound: add missing HAS_IOPORT and GENERIC_HARDIRQS dependencies

[Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>]

At Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:32:06 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
> > > > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > Why not just make CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS mandatory for all
> > > > > platforms. It is use almost everywhere now.
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder it, too...
> > > 
> > > I haven't looked into it, but I doubt if that is possible without large
> > > effort, if at all. s390 doesn't have any irq chips, nor something like
> > > edge or level triggered irqs.
> > > Instead we have floating interrupts. Does that fit into the concept of
> > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS at all?
> > > If so, we can give it a try, sure. But that won't happen any time soon.
> > > 
> > > Or are you simply proposing we should have both, our own irq handling plus
> > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS with dummy functions?
> > 
> > I think you should use GENERIC_HARDIRQ just for PCI, and rename the s390
> > interrupt handling to something that does not conflict. I understand
> > that the concepts are quite different, but with PCI support, you actually
> > do get all the weird interrupt hardware.
> > More importantly, some features provided by GENERIC_HARDIRQ are replacing
> > the traditional interfaces now, e.g. devm_request_irq() is actually
> > recommended over request_irq() for normal drivers these days, as it
> > simplifies the error handling.
> 
> That sounds reasonable. And a quick grep seems to indicate that s390
> is the last architecture with !GENERIC_HARDIRQS.
> However having two completely different IRQ subsystems within one
> architecture will bring up some interesting questions like e.g.
> how should /proc/interrupts look like? Or /proc/stat:intr ?
> 
> Jan considered turning GENERIC_HARDIRQS on for PCI support, but didn't.
> I don't know why he didn't and since he left, we can't ask him anymore.
> 
> So for the time being I'd appreciate it if we can simply add the
> additional GENERIC_HARDIRQS dependencies where needed, since I consider
> a working allmodconfig quite important.
> Later on we should indeed try to switch to GENERIC_HARDIRQS and then
> git rid of that config option completely. However I leave that to
> Sebastian and Gerald who now take care of our PCI code ;)

OK, then I'll queue the sound patch to sound.git tree as is.
If things get easier, let's fix them later.


thanks,

Takashi