Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1299357 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-30 14:30 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-12-30 14:30 +0100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH V9 1/2] ACPI, PCI, irq: remove interrupt count restriction Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> - 2015-12-30 14:30 +0100
| From | Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 14:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V9 1/2] ACPI, PCI, irq: remove interrupt count restriction |
| Message-ID | <qLoZb-79S-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi Bjorn, Andy; On 12/9/2015 12:14 PM, Christopher Covington wrote: > Hi Sinan, > > On 12/09/2015 12:09 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >> On 12/9/2015 11:59 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>>> + if (trigger != ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_LEVEL || >>>>> + polarity != ACPI_MADT_POLARITY_ACTIVE_LOW) >>>>> + penalty = PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_ALWAYS; >>>>> + else >>>>> + penalty = PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING; >>>>> + >>>>> + acpi_irq_add_penalty(irq, penalty); >>> Why not to change in place? I think a common sense rule is not to >>> change something existing if it doesn't add any significant value. >>> >> Sorry, I didn't understand what you mean. Are you asking why we are >> changing lines like above? >> >> If yes, acpi_irq_penalty used to be an array of 256 entries. Now, >> acpi_irq_penalty doesn't exist anymore as it was replaced with a linklist. >> >>> - acpi_irq_penalty[irq] += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING; >>> + acpi_irq_add_penalty(irq, PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING); > > I think Andy was suggesting that you make the change without introducing > the penalty variable. > > Christopher Covington > Andy, Is Chris' interpretation correct? BTW, I suggest you spend some time around checkpatch for contributions. I could have caught most of the issues you are generally concerned before submitting a patch. Bjorn, Is there any other question you need me to address on this patch? -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web