[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070531133426.GA30616@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:34:26 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, ak@...e.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nanhai.zou@...el.com,
asit.k.mallick@...el.com, keith.packard@...el.com,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 irq: check remote IRR bit before migrating level triggered irq (v2)
looks good to me:
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
with a few minor style nits:
> +static int io_apic_level_ack_pending(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + struct irq_pin_list *entry;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int pending = 0;
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&ioapic_lock, flags);
newline after variable sections please.
> + entry = irq_2_pin + irq;
> + for (;;) {
> + unsigned int reg;
> + int pin;
> + pin = entry->pin;
ditto.
> + if (pin == -1)
> + break;
> + reg = io_apic_read(entry->apic, 0x10 + pin*2);
> + /* Is the remote IRR bit set? */
> + pending |= (reg >> 14) & 1;
> + if (!entry->next)
> + break;
> + entry = irq_2_pin + entry->next;
> + }
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ioapic_lock, flags);
> + return pending;
optional: it looks a bit better with a newline before the 'return'
statement.
> +}
> +
> +
and here there's one too much newline :-)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists