On 27/02/2020 11:59, afzal mohammed wrote: > request_irq() is preferred over setup_irq(). The early boot setup_irq() > invocations happen either via 'init_IRQ()' or 'time_init()', while > memory allocators are ready by 'mm_init()'. > > Per tglx[1], setup_irq() existed in olden days when allocators were not > ready by the time early interrupts were initialized. > > Hence replace setup_irq() by request_irq(). > > Seldom remove_irq() usage has been observed coupled with setup_irq(), > wherever that has been found, it too has been replaced by free_irq(). > > A build error that was reported by kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > in the previous version of the patch also has been fixed. > > [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.20.1710191609480.1971@nanos > > Signed-off-by: afzal mohammed <afzal.mohd.ma@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Hi, > > There was a build error in v2, which was reported by kbuild test > robot and it was suggested to add Reported-by to the patch. But since > the change is being fixed up w/ original patch, if i add Reported-by, > it will give a feeling as though robot has reported the necessity of > this patch as whole, so i have credited test robot in a different way > in the commit message. If the proper way is to add Reported-by tag > itself or some other way, let me know, i will change accordingly. > > Hi Daniel, Linus, > > i have removed your Acked-by's as now patch has been modified (though > only slightly the file timer-prima2.c) to fix the build error. I'm fine with the changes, I'll apply this patch for timers/drivers/next -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
