Hello, Christoph.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 07:26:01AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> irq already contains the interrupt number for the port, don't add the port
> index to it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/ata/libahci.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libahci.c b/drivers/ata/libahci.c
> index 7461a58..dcf2c72 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libahci.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libahci.c
> @@ -2524,7 +2524,7 @@ static int ahci_host_activate_multi_irqs(struct ata_host *host,
>
> /* Do not receive interrupts sent by dummy ports */
> if (!pp) {
> - disable_irq(irq + i);
> + disable_irq(irq);
> continue;
> }
I'm not following. The driver at that point has irqs in the range
[@irq, @irq + @host->n_ports - 1] and is trying to activate them and
the above code block disables irq for a port which should be skipped.
Why wouldn't it need to be indexed?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
