On Wednesday 22 July 2009, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > I do think this should be set up by the driver - the platform/arch code > > can't be 100% certain what model of servicing interrupts driver will > > chose, nor the driver can know whether arch code set things up for > > threaded or classic interrupt handling. > > > > Since handle_level_oneshot_irq requires drivers to use threaded IRQ > > model (in absence of thread interrupt will never be unmasked) it would > > be better if we did set it up automatically, right there in > > request_threaded_irq(). This would reduce maintenance issues between > > platform and driver code. > > No, it's the wrong way round. > > The platform code sets up the platform devices. So there is no real > good reason that the platform code does not know about the details. Except for the "development board" family of exceptions to such rules ... or the "Processor-on-Card" model, where the same platform/card gets used in a variety of different chassis configurations, with different peripherals. It may not be possible to know *which* configuration is being used at board setup time. However it most certainly is known by the time a driver is configuring. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
