Hi Miguel!
On 1/1/21 9:42 PM, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
>>
>> Verified on my SH-7785LCR board. Boots fine.
>>
>> Tested-by: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>
> Thanks for testing, John!
>
> I think Masahiro was concerned about the error
On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> Verified on my SH-7785LCR board. Boots fine.
>
> Tested-by: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Thanks for testing, John!
I think Masahiro was concerned about the error case (I assume you
tested the happy path).
In any case, if no
Hi Nick!
On 12/22/20 9:54 PM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> request_irq is marked __must_check, but the call in shx3_prepare_cpus
> has a void return type, so it can't propagate failure to the caller.
> Follow cues from hexagon and just print an error.
>
> Fixes: c7936b9abcf5 ("sh: smp: Hook in to
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 5:54 AM Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> request_irq is marked __must_check, but the call in shx3_prepare_cpus
> has a void return type, so it can't propagate failure to the caller.
> Follow cues from hexagon and just print an error.
>
> Fixes: c7936b9abcf5 ("sh: smp: Hook in
request_irq is marked __must_check, but the call in shx3_prepare_cpus
has a void return type, so it can't propagate failure to the caller.
Follow cues from hexagon and just print an error.
Fixes: c7936b9abcf5 ("sh: smp: Hook in to the generic IPI handler for SH-X3
SMP.")
Cc: Miguel Ojeda
Cc:
5 matches
Mail list logo