On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:27:06AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > So the conversion to a non-deprecated API is introducing cruft? > > > That sounds like the change defeats its own point :) > > > > The commit that introduced the force parameter says: > > > > The replacement for set_affinity() has an extra argument "bool > > force". The reason for this is to notify the low level code, that the > > move has to be done right away and cannot be delayed until the next > > interrupt happens. That's necessary to handle the irq fixup on cpu > > unplug in the generic code. > > > > The only callers of chip->irq_set_affinity() is in kernel/irq/manage.c > > > > And like David I can only see irq_set_affinity() being called with force=false. > > As force tell us to set the affinity and we do so on sparc in all > > cases it looks safe to ignore the parameter. > > I will update the changelog to include this info in next version, > > if Thomas does not have other inputs. > > The change was done as a preparatory for further cleanups down the > road. I did not want to add irq_set_affinity() now and then change all > those instances again 6 month later down the road. Thanks for info. It would have been good to have had this info in the changelog. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
