Guru Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 04:53:08PM +0100, Aidan MacDonald wrote: >> Call sub_irq_reg() instead of calculating the offset of the register >> to avoid relying on the fact that sub_irq_reg() is a linear function. > > Seems like unmask_reg is the only register whose address is not calculated > using sub_irq_reg(). Switching to using sub_irq_reg() will bring it in line > with the other calculations. > > Could you please incorporate this info in your commit message as well? This > should be the rationale for this change; that it allows for the get_irq_reg() > patch should be secondary. I'll note that in v3, thanks. > > The change seems okay to me, but I'd ideally like someone to pick this up and > test it out just to make sure it doesn't break existing behaviour for them. > > Thank you. > > Guru Das.
