Re: [PATCH] Add SA_PERCPU_IRQ flag support

From: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich_at_sgi.com>
Date: 2006-03-21 01:25:45
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 07:22:07AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 08:17:47AM -0600, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 01:49:00AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef ARCH_HAS_IRQ_PER_CPU
> > > >  +	if (new->flags & SA_PERCPU_IRQ)
> > > >  +		desc->status |= IRQ_PER_CPU;
> > > >  +#endif
> > > 
> > > OK, five architectures define ARCH_HAS_IRQ_PER_CPU but only one of them
> > > defines SA_PERCPU_IRQ.    Giving up.
> > 
> > Could we do the following (at least for now)?:
> > 
> > +#if defined(ARCH_HAS_IRQ_PER_CPU) && defined(SA_PERCPU_IRQ)
> > +	if (new->flags & SA_PERCPU_IRQ)
> > +		desc->status |= IRQ_PER_CPU;
> > +#endif
> 
> Why not just
> 
> #ifdef SA_PERCPU_IRQ
> 	if (new->flags & SA_PERCPU_IRQ)
> 		desc->status |= IRQ_PER_CPU;
> #endif

Fine with me. I was simply maintaining the ARCH_HAS_IRQ_PER_CPU convention.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Tue Mar 21 01:26:29 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-03-21 01:26:38 EST