-Original Message-
From: Wood Scott-B07421
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 2:39 PM
To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
Cc: b...@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mpic: supply a .disable callback
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:38 +0800, Dongsheng
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt [mailto:b...@kernel.crashing.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 1:50 PM
To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mpic: supply a .disable callback
On Tue, 2014-01
: [PATCH] powerpc/mpic: supply a .disable callback
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:38 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote:
From: Wang Dongsheng dongsheng.w...@freescale.com
Currently MPIC provides .mask, but not .disable. This means that
effectively disable_irq() soft-disables the interrupt
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mpic: supply a .disable callback
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:38 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote:
From: Wang Dongsheng dongsheng.w...@freescale.com
Currently MPIC provides .mask, but not .disable. This means that
effectively disable_irq() soft-disables
From: Wang Dongsheng dongsheng.w...@freescale.com
Currently MPIC provides .mask, but not .disable. This means that
effectively disable_irq() soft-disables the interrupt, and you get
a .mask call if an interrupt actually occurs.
I'm not sure if this was intended as a performance benefit (it
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:38 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote:
From: Wang Dongsheng dongsheng.w...@freescale.com
Currently MPIC provides .mask, but not .disable. This means that
effectively disable_irq() soft-disables the interrupt, and you get
a .mask call if an interrupt actually occurs.
I'm
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:38 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote:
From: Wang Dongsheng dongsheng.w...@freescale.com
Why did you change the author field?
-Scott
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
