On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >> > On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> There is
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>> > On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> >>
>> >> There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context,
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >>
> >> There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
> >> as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
>> as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
>>
>> Use the proper accessor for the msi
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han jg1@samsung.com wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
Use the proper accessor for the msi
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han jg1@samsung.com wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han jg1@samsung.com wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
There is no reason to care about irq_desc
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jingoo Han jg1@samsung.com wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
> as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
>
> Use the proper accessor for the msi descriptor
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: Bjorn
There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
Use the proper accessor for the msi descriptor
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas
Cc: Jingoo Han
Cc: Mohit Kumar
Cc: pci
---
There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
Use the proper accessor for the msi descriptor
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com
Cc: Jingoo Han jg1@samsung.com
On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
There is no reason to care about irq_desc in that context, escpecially
as irq_data for that interrupt is retrieved as well.
Use the proper accessor for the msi descriptor
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de
Cc:
12 matches
Mail list logo