[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54109DA9.4070208@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:51:21 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: perf: Don't sleep while atomic when enabling per-cpu
interrupts
On 09/10/14 11:21, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>
>> Here's the interdiff. Is there a reason arm64 casts data to an unsigned
>> int pointer when what's passed is an int pointer?
> There has to be a cast to something because data is a void *.
> enable_percpu_irq takes an unsigned int, so I guess that's why it was
> chosen. I'm not fussed either way.
Right, I'm just annoyed that what's passed in the void * is not an
unsigned int, it's an int. I agree that eventually we'll hand it to
enable_percpu_irq and there it will be implicitly casted to an unsigned
int so it really doesn't matter.
>
> Feel free to submit the full patch with my ack:
>
> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
>
Ok thanks.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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