Passing vector number (was Re: API modification request)

[Valette Eric]

Till Straumann wrote:
> On the idea of passing a vector number:
> 
> - it's certainly MUCH better than nothing (in this sense, the 'new'
>   API present on PPC/X86 and ARM is a huge step back).

Step back that did not prevent to code anything :-)

> - the 'new' API could certainly pass the vector (irq->name) along.
> 
> - however, IMO it's still preferrable to have the user argument:
> 
>   1) vector number is BSP/hardware dependent (but needs to be
>      known for installing the ISR anyways).
>   2) On hardware where you have to lookup the handler (i.e. a slot
>      a 'connect_data' table, getting the 'arg' is not far away
>      (see discussion on the original thread).
>   3) Makes porting vxWorks code is easier. IMO, this is important
>      if we want to make migration as painless as possible.

I would tend to agree with Till : my personnal feeling is that the 
vector itself is useless so I would vote for either a void* or nothing 
(sorry joel).

-- 
    __
   /  `                   	Eric Valette
  /--   __  o _.          	6 rue Paul Le Flem
(___, / (_(_(__         	35740 Pace

Tel: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76	Fax: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76
E-mail: eric.valette at free.fr