Re: [PATCH-1] A new irq device interface

[Junling Ma]

Ok. Will do.

Junling

> On Aug 2, 2020, at 4:52 PM, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> Junling Ma, le dim. 02 août 2020 16:45:22 -0700, a ecrit:
>> I guess you misunderstood what I mean. I mean that there seems to be no 
>> interest in the discussion on IRC yesterday that we introduce a new scheme.
> 
> That's because you asked on IRC at a random time.
> 
> That's what IRC is not good at: collecting the community opinion on
> something. If you ask on IRC at a random time, you'll only get the opion
> of the people who actually look at IRC at that random time.
> 
> I (and I'm maintainer here...) do believe that the way you propose makes
> sense, for the reason you mentioned (not having to implement the methods
> for all device interface implementations while it's only useful for one
> of them). Introducing another interface (like the i386 perm) could make
> sense, but since device_read/write can offer exactly the same semantic,
> there is no reason to introduce one.
> 
>> If so, I will not work on that part.
> 
> Please do. That part does make sense, is an improvement, and does not
> require to revamp the whole thing, just the interface. Please however
> also fix libddekit so we don't completely break netdde along the way
> (and so that we actually have a well-tested testcase for the interface).
> 
>> For part I, ie., moving the irq management to mach side, it people
>> think it is useful, I will prepare a series of revised patch for that.
> 
> I'm not sure what feature exactly you mean, I'll just remind the
> (current) requirements ahead of time:
> 
> - we still need the linux/ part to be working.
> - we want to get rid of the whole linux/ directory at some point
> 
> so working on moving pieces of the IRQ handling to mach does make a lot
> of sense since that's what we'll want in the end. Just make sure to keep
> the linux/ part working for now.
> 
> Samuel