[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1802230938510.11168@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:42:38 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Radoslaw Pietrzyk <radoslaw.pietrzyk@...il.com>
cc: Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, Ludovic BARRE <ludovic.barre@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] irqchip: stm32: Optimizes and cleans up stm32-exti
irq_domain
Radoslaw,
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018, Radoslaw Pietrzyk wrote:
> - discards setting handle_simple_irq handler for hierarchy interrupts
> - removes acking in chained irq handler as this is done by
> irq_chip itself inside handle_edge_irq
> - removes unneeded irq_domain_ops.xlate callback
if that's all functionally correct, then this is a nice cleanup. Though
from the above changelog its hard to tell because it merily tells WHAT the
patch does, but not WHY. The WHY is the important information for a
reviewer who is not familiar with the particular piece of code/hardware.
Can you please amend the changelog with proper explanations why a
particular piece of code is not needed or has to be changed to something
else?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists