Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1433550 > unrolled thread

[PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence

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.

Contents

  [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-29 10:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-06-29 15:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-29 20:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-06-29 23:20 +0200
          Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-29 23:20 +0200
            Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-06-29 23:50 +0200

#1433550 — [PATCH V2 4/4] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct operator precedence

The omitted parenthesis prevents the addition operation when
acpi_penalize_isa_irq function is called.

Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
index 8c08971..c983bf7 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
@@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ void acpi_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active)
 {
 	if ((irq >= 0) && (irq < ARRAY_SIZE(acpi_isa_irq_penalty)))
 		acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
-			active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
+		  (active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING);
 }
 
 bool acpi_isa_irq_available(int irq)
-- 
1.8.2.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1433721

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> The omitted parenthesis prevents the addition operation when
> acpi_penalize_isa_irq function is called.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>

Well, this is a rather obvious one, so I'm wondering why it is the
last one in the series?

> ---
>  drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> index 8c08971..c983bf7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> @@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ void acpi_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active)
>  {
>         if ((irq >= 0) && (irq < ARRAY_SIZE(acpi_isa_irq_penalty)))
>                 acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
> -                       active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
> +                 (active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING);
>  }
>
>  bool acpi_isa_irq_available(int irq)
> --

Thanks,
Rafael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1433963

On 6/29/2016 9:16 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
> Well, this is a rather obvious one, so I'm wondering why it is the
> last one in the series?
> 

The first three are more relevant to each other. It makes easy to
correlate the changes.

-- 
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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1434057

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 6/29/2016 9:16 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
>> Well, this is a rather obvious one, so I'm wondering why it is the
>> last one in the series?
>>
>
> The first three are more relevant to each other. It makes easy to
> correlate the changes.

But this one doesn't seem to depend on them and it could be applied
without them, right?

Thanks,
Rafael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1434059

On 6/29/2016 5:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 6/29/2016 9:16 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
>>> Well, this is a rather obvious one, so I'm wondering why it is the
>>> last one in the series?
>>>
>>
>> The first three are more relevant to each other. It makes easy to
>> correlate the changes.
> 
> But this one doesn't seem to depend on them and it could be applied
> without them, right?
> 

Sure. It has no dependency. 


> Thanks,
> Rafael
> 


-- 
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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1434072

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 6/29/2016 5:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>> On 6/29/2016 9:16 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Well, this is a rather obvious one, so I'm wondering why it is the
>>>> last one in the series?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The first three are more relevant to each other. It makes easy to
>>> correlate the changes.
>>
>> But this one doesn't seem to depend on them and it could be applied
>> without them, right?
>>
>
> Sure. It has no dependency.

OK

I've queued up this one.

Thanks,
Rafael

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web