[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1307011325520.9968@nippy.intranet>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 17:46:48 +1000 (EST)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k/mac: Allocate IOP message pool and queues
dynamically
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> +static void __init alloc_msg_queue(int iop_num)
> +{
> + iop_send_queue[iop_num] =
> + kzalloc(NUM_IOP_CHAN * sizeof(**iop_send_queue), GFP_KERNEL);
> + iop_listeners[iop_num] =
> + kzalloc(NUM_IOP_CHAN * sizeof(**iop_listeners), GFP_KERNEL);
Perhaps we should panic on allocation failure? It might upset the static
checkers otherwise. Can be done in another patch I guess.
> -
> -/*
> - * Register the interrupt handler for the IOPs.
> - * TODO: might be wrong for non-OSS machines. Anyone?
> - */
> -
> -void __init iop_register_interrupts(void)
> -{
> - if (iop_ism_present) {
> + /*
> + * Register the interrupt handler for the IOPs.
> + * TODO: might be wrong for non-OSS machines. Anyone?
My testing with a non-OSS machine (Quadra 950) indicates that the TODO is
obsolete. And the comment "register the interrupt handler for the IOPs" is
a bit silly. It merely re-phrases the code. Otherwise, this patch looks
good to me. Thanks.
Finn
--
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